Dataset statistics
| Number of variables | 50 |
|---|---|
| Number of observations | 499 |
| Missing cells | 6257 |
| Missing cells (%) | 25.1% |
| Duplicate rows | 0 |
| Duplicate rows (%) | 0.0% |
| Total size in memory | 134.4 KiB |
| Average record size in memory | 275.8 B |
Variable types
| Numeric | 14 |
|---|---|
| Categorical | 33 |
| Unsupported | 3 |
ethic_appr has a high cardinality: 498 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_1_conc has a high cardinality: 253 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_1_add_info has a high cardinality: 90 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_2_conc has a high cardinality: 274 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_2_add_info has a high cardinality: 91 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_3_conc has a high cardinality: 227 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_3_add_info has a high cardinality: 76 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_4_conc has a high cardinality: 253 distinct values | High cardinality |
study_4_add_info has a high cardinality: 87 distinct values | High cardinality |
design_add_fac has a high cardinality: 192 distinct values | High cardinality |
rank_add_fac_1 has a high cardinality: 67 distinct values | High cardinality |
df_index is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 4 other fields | High correlation |
age is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 5 other fields | High correlation |
rank_sci_repro is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
rank_resp is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
rank_just is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
rank_anony is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
rank_harms is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 5 other fields | High correlation |
rank_balance is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 8 other fields | High correlation |
rank_pub_interst is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 3 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_1_pos is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 7 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_2_pos is highly correlated with politic_views and 8 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_3_pos is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 7 other fields | High correlation |
aware_sm_advan_score is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
aware_sm_use_score is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 2 other fields | High correlation |
sm_use is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 5 other fields | High correlation |
gender_id is highly correlated with ethnic_id and 1 other fields | High correlation |
ethnic_id is highly correlated with gender_id and 6 other fields | High correlation |
edu is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 4 other fields | High correlation |
politic_views is highly correlated with ethnic_id and 5 other fields | High correlation |
aware_sm_res is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 4 other fields | High correlation |
study_1_ethic_acc is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 8 other fields | High correlation |
study_1_add_info is highly correlated with df_index and 35 other fields | High correlation |
study_2_ethic_acc is highly correlated with study_1_ethic_acc and 8 other fields | High correlation |
study_2_add_info is highly correlated with df_index and 28 other fields | High correlation |
study_3_ethic_acc is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
study_3_add_info is highly correlated with df_index and 36 other fields | High correlation |
study_4_ethic_acc is highly correlated with study_1_ethic_acc and 8 other fields | High correlation |
study_4_add_info is highly correlated with df_index and 38 other fields | High correlation |
design_cont is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 13 other fields | High correlation |
design_num_users is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 12 other fields | High correlation |
design_res_purp is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 11 other fields | High correlation |
design_len_data is highly correlated with study_2_add_info and 11 other fields | High correlation |
design_admin_inter is highly correlated with study_2_add_info and 11 other fields | High correlation |
design_inter_type is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 9 other fields | High correlation |
design_partic_aware is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 6 other fields | High correlation |
design_inter_impact is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 12 other fields | High correlation |
design_type_data is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 10 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_1 is highly correlated with sm_use and 27 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_2 is highly correlated with sm_use and 27 other fields | High correlation |
rank_add_fac_3 is highly correlated with df_index and 29 other fields | High correlation |
aware_sm_interact_score is highly correlated with study_1_add_info and 4 other fields | High correlation |
study_1_ethic_acc has 157 (31.5%) missing values | Missing |
study_1_conc has 242 (48.5%) missing values | Missing |
study_1_add_info has 407 (81.6%) missing values | Missing |
study_2_ethic_acc has 173 (34.7%) missing values | Missing |
study_2_conc has 225 (45.1%) missing values | Missing |
study_2_add_info has 405 (81.2%) missing values | Missing |
study_3_ethic_acc has 270 (54.1%) missing values | Missing |
study_3_conc has 271 (54.3%) missing values | Missing |
study_3_add_info has 423 (84.8%) missing values | Missing |
study_4_ethic_acc has 180 (36.1%) missing values | Missing |
study_4_conc has 246 (49.3%) missing values | Missing |
study_4_add_info has 412 (82.6%) missing values | Missing |
design_add_fac has 299 (59.9%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_1 has 418 (83.8%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_1_pos has 350 (70.1%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_2 has 473 (94.8%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_2_pos has 412 (82.6%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_3 has 477 (95.6%) missing values | Missing |
rank_add_fac_3_pos has 417 (83.6%) missing values | Missing |
df_index is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
ethic_appr is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_1_conc is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_1_add_info is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_2_conc is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_2_add_info is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_3_conc is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_3_add_info is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_4_conc is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
study_4_add_info is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
design_add_fac is uniformly distributed | Uniform |
df_index has unique values | Unique |
aware_sm_advan is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
aware_sm_interact is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
aware_sm_use is an unsupported type, check if it needs cleaning or further analysis | Unsupported |
rank_add_fac_1_pos has 12 (2.4%) zeros | Zeros |
rank_add_fac_2_pos has 11 (2.2%) zeros | Zeros |
rank_add_fac_3_pos has 11 (2.2%) zeros | Zeros |
aware_sm_advan_score has 47 (9.4%) zeros | Zeros |
aware_sm_use_score has 5 (1.0%) zeros | Zeros |
Reproduction
| Analysis started | 2022-11-21 12:14:43.854181 |
|---|---|
| Analysis finished | 2022-11-21 12:15:01.635959 |
| Duration | 17.78 seconds |
| Software version | pandas-profiling v3.4.0 |
| Download configuration | config.json |
| Distinct | 499 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 250 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 499 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 25.9 |
| Q1 | 125.5 |
| median | 250 |
| Q3 | 374.5 |
| 95-th percentile | 474.1 |
| Maximum | 499 |
| Range | 498 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 249 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 144.1931575 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.57677263 |
| Kurtosis | -1.2 |
| Mean | 250 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 125 |
| Skewness | 0 |
| Sum | 124750 |
| Variance | 20791.66667 |
| Monotonicity | Strictly increasing |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 329 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 342 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 341 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 340 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 339 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 338 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 337 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 336 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 335 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (489) | 489 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 1 | |
| 2 | 1 | |
| 3 | 1 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 5 | 1 | |
| 6 | 1 | |
| 7 | 1 | |
| 8 | 1 | |
| 9 | 1 | |
| 10 | 1 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 499 | 1 | |
| 498 | 1 | |
| 497 | 1 | |
| 496 | 1 | |
| 495 | 1 | |
| 494 | 1 | |
| 493 | 1 | |
| 492 | 1 | |
| 491 | 1 | |
| 490 | 1 |
| Distinct | 3 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 0.6% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 759.0 B |
Length
| Max length | 8 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 8 |
| Mean length | 7.250501002 |
| Min length | 6 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 3618 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 14 |
| Distinct categories | 2 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 1 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | |
| 3rd row | |
| 4th row | |
| 5th row |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 258 | ||
| 133 | ||
| 108 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 258 | ||
| 133 | ||
| 108 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| o | 516 | |
| e | 499 | |
| t | 349 | |
| d | 266 | |
| F | 258 | |
| a | 258 | |
| c | 258 | |
| b | 258 | |
| k | 258 | |
| i | 241 | |
| Other values (4) | 457 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 3119 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 13.8% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| o | 516 | |
| e | 499 | |
| t | 349 | |
| d | 266 | |
| a | 258 | |
| c | 258 | |
| b | 258 | |
| k | 258 | |
| i | 241 | |
| w | 108 | 3.5% |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| F | 258 | |
| R | 133 | |
| T | 108 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 3618 |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| o | 516 | |
| e | 499 | |
| t | 349 | |
| d | 266 | |
| F | 258 | |
| a | 258 | |
| c | 258 | |
| b | 258 | |
| k | 258 | |
| i | 241 | |
| Other values (4) | 457 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 3618 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| o | 516 | |
| e | 499 | |
| t | 349 | |
| d | 266 | |
| F | 258 | |
| a | 258 | |
| c | 258 | |
| b | 258 | |
| k | 258 | |
| i | 241 | |
| Other values (4) | 457 |
| Distinct | 60 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 12.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 41.66332665 |
| Minimum | 18 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 78 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 18 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 23 |
| Q1 | 31 |
| median | 39 |
| Q3 | 51.5 |
| 95-th percentile | 67 |
| Maximum | 78 |
| Range | 60 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 20.5 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 13.63593166 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.3272885954 |
| Kurtosis | -0.5585557113 |
| Mean | 41.66332665 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 10 |
| Skewness | 0.5655176939 |
| Sum | 20790 |
| Variance | 185.9386323 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 35 | 22 | 4.4% |
| 34 | 20 | 4.0% |
| 37 | 19 | 3.8% |
| 29 | 18 | 3.6% |
| 27 | 18 | 3.6% |
| 26 | 17 | 3.4% |
| 44 | 15 | 3.0% |
| 31 | 15 | 3.0% |
| 38 | 15 | 3.0% |
| 23 | 14 | 2.8% |
| Other values (50) | 326 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 18 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 19 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 20 | 3 | 0.6% |
| 21 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 22 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 23 | 14 | |
| 24 | 8 | |
| 25 | 10 | |
| 26 | 17 | |
| 27 | 18 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 78 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 76 | 3 | |
| 75 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 74 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 73 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 72 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 71 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 70 | 6 | |
| 69 | 3 | |
| 68 | 2 | 0.4% |
| Distinct | 4 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 0.8% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 831.0 B |
| Male | |
|---|---|
| Female | |
| Non-binary / third gender | 8 |
| Prefer not to say | 2 |
Length
| Max length | 25 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 4 |
| Mean length | 5.218436874 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 2604 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 23 |
| Distinct categories | 5 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Male |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Male |
| 3rd row | Female |
| 4th row | Female |
| 5th row | Female |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Male | 282 | |
| Female | 207 | |
| Non-binary / third gender | 8 | 1.6% |
| Prefer not to say | 2 | 0.4% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| male | 282 | |
| female | 207 | |
| non-binary | 8 | 1.5% |
| 8 | 1.5% | |
| third | 8 | 1.5% |
| gender | 8 | 1.5% |
| prefer | 2 | 0.4% |
| not | 2 | 0.4% |
| to | 2 | 0.4% |
| say | 2 | 0.4% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 716 | |
| a | 499 | |
| l | 489 | |
| M | 282 | 10.8% |
| F | 207 | 7.9% |
| m | 207 | 7.9% |
| 30 | 1.2% | |
| r | 28 | 1.1% |
| n | 26 | 1.0% |
| d | 16 | 0.6% |
| Other values (13) | 104 | 4.0% |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 2059 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 19.2% |
| Space Separator | 30 | 1.2% |
| Dash Punctuation | 8 | 0.3% |
| Other Punctuation | 8 | 0.3% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 716 | |
| a | 499 | |
| l | 489 | |
| m | 207 | 10.1% |
| r | 28 | 1.4% |
| n | 26 | 1.3% |
| d | 16 | 0.8% |
| i | 16 | 0.8% |
| o | 12 | 0.6% |
| t | 12 | 0.6% |
| Other values (6) | 38 | 1.8% |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| M | 282 | |
| F | 207 | |
| N | 8 | 1.6% |
| P | 2 | 0.4% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 30 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 8 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| / | 8 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 2558 | |
| Common | 46 | 1.8% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 716 | |
| a | 499 | |
| l | 489 | |
| M | 282 | 11.0% |
| F | 207 | 8.1% |
| m | 207 | 8.1% |
| r | 28 | 1.1% |
| n | 26 | 1.0% |
| d | 16 | 0.6% |
| i | 16 | 0.6% |
| Other values (10) | 72 | 2.8% |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 30 | ||
| - | 8 | 17.4% |
| / | 8 | 17.4% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 2604 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 716 | |
| a | 499 | |
| l | 489 | |
| M | 282 | 10.8% |
| F | 207 | 7.9% |
| m | 207 | 7.9% |
| 30 | 1.2% | |
| r | 28 | 1.1% |
| n | 26 | 1.0% |
| d | 16 | 0.6% |
| Other values (13) | 104 | 4.0% |
| Distinct | 12 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 2.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 1023.0 B |
| White / Caucasian | |
|---|---|
| African-American | 32 |
| Mixed race | 20 |
| Hispanic | 19 |
| Asian - Eastern | 16 |
| Other values (7) | 15 |
Length
| Max length | 17 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 17 |
| Mean length | 16.15230461 |
| Min length | 5 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8060 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 34 |
| Distinct categories | 5 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 5 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 1.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Asian - Eastern |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Mixed race |
| 3rd row | Pacific Islander |
| 4th row | White / Caucasian |
| 5th row | Native-American |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| White / Caucasian | 397 | |
| African-American | 32 | 6.4% |
| Mixed race | 20 | 4.0% |
| Hispanic | 19 | 3.8% |
| Asian - Eastern | 16 | 3.2% |
| Asian - Indian | 7 | 1.4% |
| Native-American | 3 | 0.6% |
| Asian - Southeast | 1 | 0.2% |
| Carribean | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (2) | 2 | 0.4% |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 421 | ||
| white | 397 | |
| caucasian | 397 | |
| african-american | 32 | 2.3% |
| asian | 24 | 1.8% |
| mixed | 20 | 1.5% |
| race | 20 | 1.5% |
| hispanic | 19 | 1.4% |
| eastern | 16 | 1.2% |
| indian | 7 | 0.5% |
| Other values (10) | 12 | 0.9% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1353 | |
| i | 956 | |
| 866 | ||
| n | 540 | 6.7% |
| c | 505 | 6.3% |
| e | 497 | 6.2% |
| s | 459 | 5.7% |
| t | 421 | 5.2% |
| h | 399 | 5.0% |
| C | 398 | 4.9% |
| Other values (24) | 1666 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 5782 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 956 | 11.9% |
| Space Separator | 866 | 10.7% |
| Other Punctuation | 397 | 4.9% |
| Dash Punctuation | 59 | 0.7% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1353 | |
| i | 956 | |
| n | 540 | 9.3% |
| c | 505 | 8.7% |
| e | 497 | 8.6% |
| s | 459 | 7.9% |
| t | 421 | 7.3% |
| h | 399 | 6.9% |
| u | 398 | 6.9% |
| r | 109 | 1.9% |
| Other values (10) | 145 | 2.5% |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| C | 398 | |
| W | 397 | |
| A | 91 | 9.5% |
| M | 20 | 2.1% |
| H | 19 | 2.0% |
| E | 16 | 1.7% |
| I | 8 | 0.8% |
| N | 3 | 0.3% |
| P | 2 | 0.2% |
| S | 1 | 0.1% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 866 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| / | 397 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 59 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 6738 | |
| Common | 1322 | 16.4% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1353 | |
| i | 956 | |
| n | 540 | 8.0% |
| c | 505 | 7.5% |
| e | 497 | 7.4% |
| s | 459 | 6.8% |
| t | 421 | 6.2% |
| h | 399 | 5.9% |
| C | 398 | 5.9% |
| u | 398 | 5.9% |
| Other values (21) | 812 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 866 | ||
| / | 397 | |
| - | 59 | 4.5% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8060 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1353 | |
| i | 956 | |
| 866 | ||
| n | 540 | 6.7% |
| c | 505 | 6.3% |
| e | 497 | 6.2% |
| s | 459 | 5.7% |
| t | 421 | 5.2% |
| h | 399 | 5.0% |
| C | 398 | 4.9% |
| Other values (24) | 1666 |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 983.0 B |
| Bachelor's degree | |
|---|---|
| Highschool | |
| Master's degree or above | |
| Associate's degree | 22 |
| Some college | 7 |
| Other values (2) | 8 |
Length
| Max length | 24 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 16.06412826 |
| Min length | 10 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8016 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 27 |
| Distinct categories | 4 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Highschool |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Highschool |
| 3rd row | Bachelor's degree |
| 4th row | Highschool |
| 5th row | Highschool |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Bachelor's degree | 222 | |
| Highschool | 153 | |
| Master's degree or above | 87 | 17.4% |
| Associate's degree | 22 | 4.4% |
| Some college | 7 | 1.4% |
| Prefer not to say | 4 | 0.8% |
| Vocational training | 4 | 0.8% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| degree | 331 | |
| bachelor's | 222 | |
| highschool | 153 | |
| master's | 87 | 8.5% |
| or | 87 | 8.5% |
| above | 87 | 8.5% |
| associate's | 22 | 2.1% |
| some | 7 | 0.7% |
| college | 7 | 0.7% |
| prefer | 4 | 0.4% |
| Other values (5) | 20 | 1.9% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1440 | |
| o | 754 | |
| r | 739 | |
| s | 619 | 7.7% |
| h | 528 | 6.6% |
| 528 | 6.6% | |
| g | 495 | 6.2% |
| a | 434 | 5.4% |
| c | 408 | 5.1% |
| l | 393 | 4.9% |
| Other values (17) | 1678 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 6658 | |
| Space Separator | 528 | 6.6% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 6.2% |
| Other Punctuation | 331 | 4.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1440 | |
| o | 754 | |
| r | 739 | |
| s | 619 | |
| h | 528 | 7.9% |
| g | 495 | 7.4% |
| a | 434 | 6.5% |
| c | 408 | 6.1% |
| l | 393 | 5.9% |
| d | 331 | 5.0% |
| Other values (8) | 517 | 7.8% |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| B | 222 | |
| H | 153 | |
| M | 87 | 17.4% |
| A | 22 | 4.4% |
| S | 7 | 1.4% |
| P | 4 | 0.8% |
| V | 4 | 0.8% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 528 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ' | 331 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 7157 | |
| Common | 859 | 10.7% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1440 | |
| o | 754 | |
| r | 739 | |
| s | 619 | |
| h | 528 | 7.4% |
| g | 495 | 6.9% |
| a | 434 | 6.1% |
| c | 408 | 5.7% |
| l | 393 | 5.5% |
| d | 331 | 4.6% |
| Other values (15) | 1016 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 528 | ||
| ' | 331 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8016 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1440 | |
| o | 754 | |
| r | 739 | |
| s | 619 | 7.7% |
| h | 528 | 6.6% |
| 528 | 6.6% | |
| g | 495 | 6.2% |
| a | 434 | 5.4% |
| c | 408 | 5.1% |
| l | 393 | 4.9% |
| Other values (17) | 1678 |
| Distinct | 6 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.2% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 847.0 B |
| Very liberal | |
|---|---|
| Slightly liberal | |
| Slightly conservative | |
| Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | |
| Very conservative |
Length
| Max length | 40 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 21 |
| Mean length | 20.11623246 |
| Min length | 12 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 10038 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 23 |
| Distinct categories | 4 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Slightly liberal |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal |
| 3rd row | Very liberal |
| 4th row | Slightly conservative |
| 5th row | Very liberal |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very liberal | 150 | |
| Slightly liberal | 126 | |
| Slightly conservative | 96 | |
| Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | 89 | |
| Very conservative | 35 | 7.0% |
| Prefer not to say | 3 | 0.6% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| liberal | 365 | |
| slightly | 222 | |
| conservative | 220 | |
| very | 185 | |
| neutral | 89 | 7.0% |
| neither | 89 | 7.0% |
| or | 89 | 7.0% |
| prefer | 3 | 0.2% |
| not | 3 | 0.2% |
| to | 3 | 0.2% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1263 | |
| l | 1263 | |
| r | 1043 | |
| i | 896 | 8.9% |
| 772 | 7.7% | |
| a | 677 | 6.7% |
| t | 626 | 6.2% |
| v | 440 | 4.4% |
| y | 410 | 4.1% |
| b | 365 | 3.6% |
| Other values (13) | 2283 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 8589 | |
| Space Separator | 772 | 7.7% |
| Uppercase Letter | 588 | 5.9% |
| Other Punctuation | 89 | 0.9% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1263 | |
| l | 1263 | |
| r | 1043 | |
| i | 896 | |
| a | 677 | |
| t | 626 | |
| v | 440 | 5.1% |
| y | 410 | 4.8% |
| b | 365 | 4.2% |
| o | 315 | 3.7% |
| Other values (7) | 1291 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| S | 222 | |
| V | 185 | |
| N | 178 | |
| P | 3 | 0.5% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 772 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| / | 89 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 9177 | |
| Common | 861 | 8.6% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1263 | |
| l | 1263 | |
| r | 1043 | |
| i | 896 | |
| a | 677 | 7.4% |
| t | 626 | 6.8% |
| v | 440 | 4.8% |
| y | 410 | 4.5% |
| b | 365 | 4.0% |
| o | 315 | 3.4% |
| Other values (11) | 1879 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 772 | ||
| / | 89 | 10.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 10038 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1263 | |
| l | 1263 | |
| r | 1043 | |
| i | 896 | 8.9% |
| 772 | 7.7% | |
| a | 677 | 6.7% |
| t | 626 | 6.2% |
| v | 440 | 4.4% |
| y | 410 | 4.1% |
| b | 365 | 3.6% |
| Other values (13) | 2283 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Moderately aware | |
|---|---|
| Very aware | |
| Slightly aware | |
| Not at all aware | |
| Extremely aware |
Length
| Max length | 16 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 15 |
| Mean length | 13.98196393 |
| Min length | 10 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 6977 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 20 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Extremely aware |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Moderately aware |
| 3rd row | Extremely aware |
| 4th row | Moderately aware |
| 5th row | Extremely aware |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Moderately aware | 128 | |
| Very aware | 119 | |
| Slightly aware | 117 | |
| Not at all aware | 76 | |
| Extremely aware | 59 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| aware | 499 | |
| moderately | 128 | 11.1% |
| very | 119 | 10.3% |
| slightly | 117 | 10.2% |
| not | 76 | 6.6% |
| at | 76 | 6.6% |
| all | 76 | 6.6% |
| extremely | 59 | 5.1% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1278 | |
| e | 992 | |
| r | 805 | |
| 651 | ||
| l | 573 | |
| w | 499 | 7.2% |
| t | 456 | 6.5% |
| y | 423 | 6.1% |
| o | 204 | 2.9% |
| M | 128 | 1.8% |
| Other values (10) | 968 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 5827 | |
| Space Separator | 651 | 9.3% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 7.2% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1278 | |
| e | 992 | |
| r | 805 | |
| l | 573 | |
| w | 499 | 8.6% |
| t | 456 | 7.8% |
| y | 423 | 7.3% |
| o | 204 | 3.5% |
| d | 128 | 2.2% |
| i | 117 | 2.0% |
| Other values (4) | 352 | 6.0% |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| M | 128 | |
| V | 119 | |
| S | 117 | |
| N | 76 | |
| E | 59 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 651 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 6326 | |
| Common | 651 | 9.3% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1278 | |
| e | 992 | |
| r | 805 | |
| l | 573 | |
| w | 499 | 7.9% |
| t | 456 | 7.2% |
| y | 423 | 6.7% |
| o | 204 | 3.2% |
| M | 128 | 2.0% |
| d | 128 | 2.0% |
| Other values (9) | 840 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 651 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 6977 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| a | 1278 | |
| e | 992 | |
| r | 805 | |
| 651 | ||
| l | 573 | |
| w | 499 | 7.2% |
| t | 456 | 6.5% |
| y | 423 | 6.1% |
| o | 204 | 2.9% |
| M | 128 | 1.8% |
| Other values (10) | 968 |
| Distinct | 498 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 99.8% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| Ethics approval is needed for any research that involves human participants; their tissue and /or data to ensure that the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of all participants are the primary consideration of the research project. | 2 |
|---|---|
| The scope of the project and actions there in do not cross certain boundaries that may purposefully negatively affect participants as well as legal regulations and standard practices. | 1 |
| That they are going to use the information they receive appropriately. They are not going to manipulate and misuse what they gather. | 1 |
| It means that, in the opinion of the institution, the study and its methods are morally acceptable. | 1 |
| Ethical approval means getting clearance to obtain data from a research subject. | 1 |
| Other values (493) |
Length
| Max length | 1026 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 207 |
| Mean length | 134.7935872 |
| Min length | 15 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 67262 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 66 |
| Distinct categories | 10 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 497 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 99.6% |
Sample
| 1st row | The scope of the project and actions there in do not cross certain boundaries that may purposefully negatively affect participants as well as legal regulations and standard practices. |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | I think Ethical Approval means that the experiment is gathering data without harm or injury to people. |
| 3rd row | Researchers focus on ethical standards towards those they gain data from. They need approval of their approach and receive methods. |
| 4th row | I would think that using "ethical approval" means that the things others collect on social media sites would need to be honest and moral. Hopefully, there would be no under-handedness used in collecting information. |
| 5th row | A set of rules of what to do and what to not do. |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Ethics approval is needed for any research that involves human participants; their tissue and /or data to ensure that the dignity, rights, safety and well-being of all participants are the primary consideration of the research project. | 2 | 0.4% |
| The scope of the project and actions there in do not cross certain boundaries that may purposefully negatively affect participants as well as legal regulations and standard practices. | 1 | 0.2% |
| That they are going to use the information they receive appropriately. They are not going to manipulate and misuse what they gather. | 1 | 0.2% |
| It means that, in the opinion of the institution, the study and its methods are morally acceptable. | 1 | 0.2% |
| Ethical approval means getting clearance to obtain data from a research subject. | 1 | 0.2% |
| It means receiving approval from an IRB or other institution that has oversight over study approval. They make sure the studies to not hamr their subjects. | 1 | 0.2% |
| Ethical approval from the institution means they will act in a way that responsible and takes in to account the persons they are researching. | 1 | 0.2% |
| Proof that the experiment is not done against people's wills and if people ask, all data will be deleted. | 1 | 0.2% |
| There is (or should be ) oversight from someone in charge, and who is ethical. | 1 | 0.2% |
| Morally correct. | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (488) | 488 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 736 | 6.5% |
| to | 474 | 4.2% |
| that | 434 | 3.8% |
| and | 295 | 2.6% |
| is | 249 | 2.2% |
| ethical | 249 | 2.2% |
| of | 227 | 2.0% |
| it | 217 | 1.9% |
| they | 212 | 1.9% |
| approval | 201 | 1.8% |
| Other values (1400) | 8064 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 11017 | ||
| e | 6612 | 9.8% |
| t | 6115 | 9.1% |
| a | 4947 | 7.4% |
| i | 4019 | 6.0% |
| o | 3823 | 5.7% |
| n | 3645 | 5.4% |
| s | 3457 | 5.1% |
| r | 3449 | 5.1% |
| h | 3300 | 4.9% |
| Other values (56) | 16878 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 54478 | |
| Space Separator | 11017 | 16.4% |
| Other Punctuation | 966 | 1.4% |
| Uppercase Letter | 705 | 1.0% |
| Dash Punctuation | 36 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 22 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 22 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 8 | < 0.1% |
| Control | 7 | < 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 6612 | |
| t | 6115 | |
| a | 4947 | 9.1% |
| i | 4019 | 7.4% |
| o | 3823 | 7.0% |
| n | 3645 | 6.7% |
| s | 3457 | 6.3% |
| r | 3449 | 6.3% |
| h | 3300 | 6.1% |
| l | 2057 | 3.8% |
| Other values (16) | 13054 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| I | 257 | |
| T | 144 | |
| E | 91 | 12.9% |
| A | 46 | 6.5% |
| B | 24 | 3.4% |
| R | 23 | 3.3% |
| M | 19 | 2.7% |
| W | 15 | 2.1% |
| P | 9 | 1.3% |
| S | 9 | 1.3% |
| Other values (15) | 68 | 9.6% |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| . | 535 | |
| , | 234 | |
| ' | 141 | 14.6% |
| " | 28 | 2.9% |
| / | 12 | 1.2% |
| ? | 10 | 1.0% |
| ; | 4 | 0.4% |
| : | 2 | 0.2% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 11017 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 36 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 22 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 22 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 8 |
Control
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 3 | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 55183 | |
| Common | 12079 | 18.0% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 6612 | |
| t | 6115 | |
| a | 4947 | 9.0% |
| i | 4019 | 7.3% |
| o | 3823 | 6.9% |
| n | 3645 | 6.6% |
| s | 3457 | 6.3% |
| r | 3449 | 6.3% |
| h | 3300 | 6.0% |
| l | 2057 | 3.7% |
| Other values (41) | 13759 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 11017 | ||
| . | 535 | 4.4% |
| , | 234 | 1.9% |
| ' | 141 | 1.2% |
| - | 36 | 0.3% |
| " | 28 | 0.2% |
| ( | 22 | 0.2% |
| ) | 22 | 0.2% |
| / | 12 | 0.1% |
| ? | 10 | 0.1% |
| Other values (5) | 22 | 0.2% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 67254 | |
| Punctuation | 8 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 11017 | ||
| e | 6612 | 9.8% |
| t | 6115 | 9.1% |
| a | 4947 | 7.4% |
| i | 4019 | 6.0% |
| o | 3823 | 5.7% |
| n | 3645 | 5.4% |
| s | 3457 | 5.1% |
| r | 3449 | 5.1% |
| h | 3300 | 4.9% |
| Other values (55) | 16870 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 8 |
| Distinct | 4 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.2% |
| Missing | 157 |
| Missing (%) | 31.5% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Somewhat acceptable | |
|---|---|
| Somewhat unacceptable | |
| Neutral | |
| Completey unacceptable |
Length
| Max length | 22 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 21 |
| Mean length | 17.78070175 |
| Min length | 7 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 6081 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 19 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Neutral |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Neutral |
| 3rd row | Somewhat acceptable |
| 4th row | Completey unacceptable |
| 5th row | Neutral |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Somewhat acceptable | 144 | |
| Somewhat unacceptable | 81 | |
| Neutral | 62 | 12.4% |
| Completey unacceptable | 55 | 11.0% |
| (Missing) | 157 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| somewhat | 225 | |
| acceptable | 144 | |
| unacceptable | 136 | |
| neutral | 62 | 10.0% |
| completey | 55 | 8.8% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 957 | |
| a | 847 | |
| t | 622 | |
| c | 560 | |
| l | 397 | 6.5% |
| p | 335 | 5.5% |
| m | 280 | 4.6% |
| b | 280 | 4.6% |
| 280 | 4.6% | |
| o | 280 | 4.6% |
| Other values (9) | 1243 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 5459 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 342 | 5.6% |
| Space Separator | 280 | 4.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 957 | |
| a | 847 | |
| t | 622 | |
| c | 560 | |
| l | 397 | |
| p | 335 | 6.1% |
| m | 280 | 5.1% |
| b | 280 | 5.1% |
| o | 280 | 5.1% |
| h | 225 | 4.1% |
| Other values (5) | 676 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| S | 225 | |
| N | 62 | 18.1% |
| C | 55 | 16.1% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 280 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 5801 | |
| Common | 280 | 4.6% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 957 | |
| a | 847 | |
| t | 622 | |
| c | 560 | |
| l | 397 | 6.8% |
| p | 335 | 5.8% |
| m | 280 | 4.8% |
| b | 280 | 4.8% |
| o | 280 | 4.8% |
| S | 225 | 3.9% |
| Other values (8) | 1018 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 280 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 6081 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 957 | |
| a | 847 | |
| t | 622 | |
| c | 560 | |
| l | 397 | 6.5% |
| p | 335 | 5.5% |
| m | 280 | 4.6% |
| b | 280 | 4.6% |
| 280 | 4.6% | |
| o | 280 | 4.6% |
| Other values (9) | 1243 |
| Distinct | 253 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 98.4% |
| Missing | 242 |
| Missing (%) | 48.5% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | 4 |
|---|---|
| participants were not aware they were part of a research study | 2 |
| the anonymity of twitter already draws an inordinate amount of these kinds of posters | 1 |
| again, not letting the twitter user that their data is being used does not seem honest and above boardi even have a hard time with the ethics of the researchers on prolific when they state, "we're sorry, but we had to deceive you", it reeks of manipulation that i will never understand is needed i am sure it is "for the greater good", but it still feels dishonest and not trustworthy | 1 |
| once again, users were not informed that they were part of a studysecondly, based on my experience from reading hate speech, i seriously doubt that a majority of people deleted their "hate" post after reading an empathetic response from a researcher the posts that i most often see deleted are those where someone has posted a reply that shows that the original poster misinterpreted some facts and were provided with correct info the rest of them often enjoy their roles as trolls and do not bother deleting much of anything | 1 |
| Other values (248) |
Length
| Max length | 809 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 182 |
| Mean length | 132.3774319 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 34021 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 45 |
| Distinct categories | 9 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 251 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 97.7% |
Sample
| 1st row | no concerns i would have loved to partake in this study in terms of watching the results |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | i feel if people know they are being judged they will act, speak, or write differently than if they don't know they are being analyzed |
| 3rd row | easy enough for an outside government to try copying such a study with the sole purpose of creating much more polarization, hate, etc not that it hasn't been tried and tested perhaps innumerable times by all types of foreign or domestic entities as far as we know no actual study would have really been needed to know that using a type of marketing manipulation could alter the recipients moodlevels of concernanxietyhateetc |
| 4th row | the participants were not were of this research study being conducted therefore it is unethical |
| 5th row | deceitful and lazy even with the positive result how you get results matter |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 4 | 0.8% |
| participants were not aware they were part of a research study | 2 | 0.4% |
| the anonymity of twitter already draws an inordinate amount of these kinds of posters | 1 | 0.2% |
| again, not letting the twitter user that their data is being used does not seem honest and above boardi even have a hard time with the ethics of the researchers on prolific when they state, "we're sorry, but we had to deceive you", it reeks of manipulation that i will never understand is needed i am sure it is "for the greater good", but it still feels dishonest and not trustworthy | 1 | 0.2% |
| once again, users were not informed that they were part of a studysecondly, based on my experience from reading hate speech, i seriously doubt that a majority of people deleted their "hate" post after reading an empathetic response from a researcher the posts that i most often see deleted are those where someone has posted a reply that shows that the original poster misinterpreted some facts and were provided with correct info the rest of them often enjoy their roles as trolls and do not bother deleting much of anything | 1 | 0.2% |
| although i do not feel like this is a huge ethical issue, i do feel that any type of misleading intentionally might sit on an ethical borderline | 1 | 0.2% |
| using people's data without consent for a study seems unethical | 1 | 0.2% |
| same as before, this is all public and anyone can do these things, so i have no issue with it | 1 | 0.2% |
| in order for the study's results to be accurate users couldn't know that the researchers were running a study | 1 | 0.2% |
| i feel its quit acceptable posting something that reduces the hate in general also since it helps one to rethink their post | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (243) | 243 | |
| (Missing) | 242 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 296 | 4.9% |
| to | 158 | 2.6% |
| that | 156 | 2.6% |
| i | 148 | 2.5% |
| a | 141 | 2.3% |
| of | 134 | 2.2% |
| is | 125 | 2.1% |
| they | 120 | 2.0% |
| study | 107 | 1.8% |
| not | 106 | 1.8% |
| Other values (1068) | 4546 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5808 | ||
| e | 3735 | |
| t | 3128 | 9.2% |
| a | 2221 | 6.5% |
| i | 2113 | 6.2% |
| o | 1871 | 5.5% |
| s | 1834 | 5.4% |
| n | 1794 | 5.3% |
| h | 1584 | 4.7% |
| r | 1488 | 4.4% |
| Other values (35) | 8445 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 27813 | |
| Space Separator | 5808 | 17.1% |
| Other Punctuation | 352 | 1.0% |
| Dash Punctuation | 13 | < 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 9 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 8 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 7 | < 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 7 | < 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 4 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3735 | |
| t | 3128 | |
| a | 2221 | 8.0% |
| i | 2113 | 7.6% |
| o | 1871 | 6.7% |
| s | 1834 | 6.6% |
| n | 1794 | 6.5% |
| h | 1584 | 5.7% |
| r | 1488 | 5.4% |
| d | 982 | 3.5% |
| Other values (16) | 7063 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 161 | |
| ' | 128 | |
| " | 38 | 10.8% |
| ? | 16 | 4.5% |
| ! | 5 | 1.4% |
| : | 3 | 0.9% |
| ; | 1 | 0.3% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 5 | |
| 2 | 2 | 22.2% |
| 1 | 1 | 11.1% |
| 4 | 1 | 11.1% |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 6 | |
| ] | 2 | 25.0% |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 5 | |
| [ | 2 | 28.6% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5808 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 13 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 7 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 4 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 27817 | |
| Common | 6204 | 18.2% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3735 | |
| t | 3128 | |
| a | 2221 | 8.0% |
| i | 2113 | 7.6% |
| o | 1871 | 6.7% |
| s | 1834 | 6.6% |
| n | 1794 | 6.4% |
| h | 1584 | 5.7% |
| r | 1488 | 5.3% |
| d | 982 | 3.5% |
| Other values (17) | 7067 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5808 | ||
| , | 161 | 2.6% |
| ' | 128 | 2.1% |
| " | 38 | 0.6% |
| ? | 16 | 0.3% |
| - | 13 | 0.2% |
| ’ | 7 | 0.1% |
| ) | 6 | 0.1% |
| 0 | 5 | 0.1% |
| ( | 5 | 0.1% |
| Other values (8) | 17 | 0.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 34014 | |
| Punctuation | 7 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5808 | ||
| e | 3735 | |
| t | 3128 | 9.2% |
| a | 2221 | 6.5% |
| i | 2113 | 6.2% |
| o | 1871 | 5.5% |
| s | 1834 | 5.4% |
| n | 1794 | 5.3% |
| h | 1584 | 4.7% |
| r | 1488 | 4.4% |
| Other values (34) | 8438 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 7 |
| Distinct | 90 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 97.8% |
| Missing | 407 |
| Missing (%) | 81.6% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | 3 |
|---|---|
| the fact that the fake accounts were used to try and suppress hate speech, makes it more ethical in my opinion | 1 |
| i would love to see the message that was posted by the researches to what was posted in order to see what was said and how it was worded | 1 |
| no one is getting harmed or misinformed here the study is actually trying to help people, so i think it's acceptable even though they did not know they were in a study | 1 |
| i would like to know more about what the replies actually said | 1 |
| Other values (85) |
Length
| Max length | 312 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 112.5 |
| Mean length | 97.91304348 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 9008 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 40 |
| Distinct categories | 9 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 89 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 96.7% |
Sample
| 1st row | i would be interested to know what kind of messages they sent the hate speech users that got them to change their minds |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | full disclosure of intent of researchers |
| 3rd row | see comments from previous studies |
| 4th row | it kind of depends on what the replies were i guess i'm not 100% sure if it is ethically acceptable because i don't know what the researchers said i would assume it was ok though |
| 5th row | interesting idea for a study i'd have to think long and hard about its value i no longer use twitter |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 3 | 0.6% |
| the fact that the fake accounts were used to try and suppress hate speech, makes it more ethical in my opinion | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would love to see the message that was posted by the researches to what was posted in order to see what was said and how it was worded | 1 | 0.2% |
| no one is getting harmed or misinformed here the study is actually trying to help people, so i think it's acceptable even though they did not know they were in a study | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would like to know more about what the replies actually said | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would want to know the various content of the messages created by the researchers | 1 | 0.2% |
| people in the study should have been aware or notified people before going forward with the study | 1 | 0.2% |
| no, no more information is needed the researchers lied, period | 1 | 0.2% |
| the results are illuminating in so far as it goes, but i would like to know how long lasting the effect of the empathetic messages were just the 4 days, longer, permanent change? | 1 | 0.2% |
| if users gave their consent before their data was published, this would be totally acceptable | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (80) | 80 | 16.0% |
| (Missing) | 407 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 93 | 5.8% |
| to | 73 | 4.5% |
| i | 44 | 2.7% |
| it | 33 | 2.1% |
| they | 33 | 2.1% |
| of | 32 | 2.0% |
| would | 28 | 1.7% |
| were | 26 | 1.6% |
| if | 23 | 1.4% |
| was | 23 | 1.4% |
| Other values (483) | 1200 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1532 | ||
| e | 1038 | |
| t | 806 | 8.9% |
| o | 555 | 6.2% |
| a | 545 | 6.1% |
| i | 511 | 5.7% |
| s | 502 | 5.6% |
| n | 436 | 4.8% |
| h | 414 | 4.6% |
| r | 376 | 4.2% |
| Other values (30) | 2293 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7362 | |
| Space Separator | 1532 | 17.0% |
| Other Punctuation | 80 | 0.9% |
| Decimal Number | 12 | 0.1% |
| Dash Punctuation | 6 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 6 | 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 6 | 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 3 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1038 | |
| t | 806 | |
| o | 555 | 7.5% |
| a | 545 | 7.4% |
| i | 511 | 6.9% |
| s | 502 | 6.8% |
| n | 436 | 5.9% |
| h | 414 | 5.6% |
| r | 376 | 5.1% |
| l | 272 | 3.7% |
| Other values (16) | 1907 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 44 | |
| ' | 22 | |
| ? | 11 | 13.8% |
| " | 2 | 2.5% |
| % | 1 | 1.2% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 8 | |
| 1 | 3 | 25.0% |
| 4 | 1 | 8.3% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1532 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 6 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 6 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 6 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 3 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 7365 | |
| Common | 1643 | 18.2% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1038 | |
| t | 806 | |
| o | 555 | 7.5% |
| a | 545 | 7.4% |
| i | 511 | 6.9% |
| s | 502 | 6.8% |
| n | 436 | 5.9% |
| h | 414 | 5.6% |
| r | 376 | 5.1% |
| l | 272 | 3.7% |
| Other values (17) | 1910 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1532 | ||
| , | 44 | 2.7% |
| ' | 22 | 1.3% |
| ? | 11 | 0.7% |
| 0 | 8 | 0.5% |
| - | 6 | 0.4% |
| ( | 6 | 0.4% |
| ) | 6 | 0.4% |
| 1 | 3 | 0.2% |
| " | 2 | 0.1% |
| Other values (3) | 3 | 0.2% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 9007 | |
| Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1532 | ||
| e | 1038 | |
| t | 806 | 8.9% |
| o | 555 | 6.2% |
| a | 545 | 6.1% |
| i | 511 | 5.7% |
| s | 502 | 5.6% |
| n | 436 | 4.8% |
| h | 414 | 4.6% |
| r | 376 | 4.2% |
| Other values (29) | 2292 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 3 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 0.9% |
| Missing | 173 |
| Missing (%) | 34.7% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Somewhat acceptable | |
|---|---|
| Somewhat unacceptable | |
| Neutral |
Length
| Max length | 21 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 16.66257669 |
| Min length | 7 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 5432 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 17 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Neutral |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Somewhat acceptable |
| 3rd row | Somewhat unacceptable |
| 4th row | Somewhat acceptable |
| 5th row | Neutral |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Somewhat acceptable | 133 | |
| Somewhat unacceptable | 111 | |
| Neutral | 82 | |
| (Missing) | 173 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| somewhat | 244 | |
| acceptable | 133 | |
| unacceptable | 111 | |
| neutral | 82 | 14.4% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 814 | |
| a | 814 | |
| t | 570 | |
| c | 488 | |
| l | 326 | 6.0% |
| S | 244 | 4.5% |
| b | 244 | 4.5% |
| p | 244 | 4.5% |
| 244 | 4.5% | |
| o | 244 | 4.5% |
| Other values (7) | 1200 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 4862 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 326 | 6.0% |
| Space Separator | 244 | 4.5% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 814 | |
| a | 814 | |
| t | 570 | |
| c | 488 | |
| l | 326 | |
| b | 244 | 5.0% |
| p | 244 | 5.0% |
| o | 244 | 5.0% |
| h | 244 | 5.0% |
| w | 244 | 5.0% |
| Other values (4) | 630 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| S | 244 | |
| N | 82 | 25.2% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 244 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 5188 | |
| Common | 244 | 4.5% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 814 | |
| a | 814 | |
| t | 570 | |
| c | 488 | |
| l | 326 | 6.3% |
| S | 244 | 4.7% |
| b | 244 | 4.7% |
| p | 244 | 4.7% |
| o | 244 | 4.7% |
| h | 244 | 4.7% |
| Other values (6) | 956 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 244 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 5432 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 814 | |
| a | 814 | |
| t | 570 | |
| c | 488 | |
| l | 326 | 6.0% |
| S | 244 | 4.5% |
| b | 244 | 4.5% |
| p | 244 | 4.5% |
| 244 | 4.5% | |
| o | 244 | 4.5% |
| Other values (7) | 1200 |
| Distinct | 274 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
| Missing | 225 |
| Missing (%) | 45.1% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| they probably should have been told at some point that it was a research study | 1 |
|---|---|
| using bots on unaware citizens without their consent would seem to be unethical not to mention the famous case of the linkedin founder funding the troll farm "research" to manipulate the alabama special election unethical if not criminal | 1 |
| i understand that when posting on social media, you content is at the will of everyone but, i feel if researcher or analytics are going to be performed against your inputs, you should be notified | 1 |
| participants were uninformed the idea of private messaging someone is also bothersome to me | 1 |
| in order to get accurate results for the study, the users couldn't know that they were being surveyed | 1 |
| Other values (269) |
Length
| Max length | 640 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 181.5 |
| Mean length | 124.7956204 |
| Min length | 32 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 34194 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 41 |
| Distinct categories | 8 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 274 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | going to the poster privately provided opportunity for change without the possibly of increased toxicity from users i prefer this method over commenting the "correct information" |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | i feel as though, in the above case, users had a choice to respond or not so i think it was honest |
| 3rd row | it's perfectly within someone's right to send someone else a message on any platform, therefore i believe this study was acceptable |
| 4th row | this is unethical because those involved were not adequately informed of the researchers intent |
| 5th row | it’s deception no matter how you look at it and it’s lazy as twitter users are not a representative sample of reality |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| they probably should have been told at some point that it was a research study | 1 | 0.2% |
| using bots on unaware citizens without their consent would seem to be unethical not to mention the famous case of the linkedin founder funding the troll farm "research" to manipulate the alabama special election unethical if not criminal | 1 | 0.2% |
| i understand that when posting on social media, you content is at the will of everyone but, i feel if researcher or analytics are going to be performed against your inputs, you should be notified | 1 | 0.2% |
| participants were uninformed the idea of private messaging someone is also bothersome to me | 1 | 0.2% |
| in order to get accurate results for the study, the users couldn't know that they were being surveyed | 1 | 0.2% |
| again, these researchers are just observing public activity everything they did was allowable by anyone, so i have no issues with this | 1 | 0.2% |
| i feel like because the twitter users were intentionally mislead and the fact that it was a private message makes it less ethical | 1 | 0.2% |
| the users were not aware that they were part of the study and very importantly, the study was limited to conservative users only i find that objectionable and wide open for manipulating data and drawing misleading conclusions | 1 | 0.2% |
| a private message doesn't require the user to respond, they can simply ignore if they are not interested in sharing their opinion there's no harm in asking somebody their opinion, but the information gathered needs to be anonymous | 1 | 0.2% |
| i really do not like tricks or deception on any level | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (264) | 264 | |
| (Missing) | 225 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 285 | 4.8% |
| to | 170 | 2.8% |
| i | 142 | 2.4% |
| a | 142 | 2.4% |
| of | 135 | 2.3% |
| they | 132 | 2.2% |
| that | 125 | 2.1% |
| not | 122 | 2.0% |
| is | 102 | 1.7% |
| study | 102 | 1.7% |
| Other values (1022) | 4508 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5722 | ||
| e | 3651 | |
| t | 3083 | 9.0% |
| a | 2255 | 6.6% |
| i | 2193 | 6.4% |
| s | 1951 | 5.7% |
| n | 1944 | 5.7% |
| o | 1926 | 5.6% |
| r | 1576 | 4.6% |
| h | 1476 | 4.3% |
| Other values (31) | 8417 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 28083 | |
| Space Separator | 5722 | 16.7% |
| Other Punctuation | 333 | 1.0% |
| Dash Punctuation | 32 | 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 9 | < 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 8 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 3 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3651 | |
| t | 3083 | |
| a | 2255 | 8.0% |
| i | 2193 | 7.8% |
| s | 1951 | 6.9% |
| n | 1944 | 6.9% |
| o | 1926 | 6.9% |
| r | 1576 | 5.6% |
| h | 1476 | 5.3% |
| d | 996 | 3.5% |
| Other values (16) | 7032 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 142 | |
| ' | 131 | |
| " | 34 | 10.2% |
| ? | 21 | 6.3% |
| ; | 3 | 0.9% |
| ! | 1 | 0.3% |
| : | 1 | 0.3% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 1 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 1 | 1 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5722 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 32 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 9 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 8 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 4 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 28083 | |
| Common | 6111 | 17.9% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3651 | |
| t | 3083 | |
| a | 2255 | 8.0% |
| i | 2193 | 7.8% |
| s | 1951 | 6.9% |
| n | 1944 | 6.9% |
| o | 1926 | 6.9% |
| r | 1576 | 5.6% |
| h | 1476 | 5.3% |
| d | 996 | 3.5% |
| Other values (16) | 7032 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5722 | ||
| , | 142 | 2.3% |
| ' | 131 | 2.1% |
| " | 34 | 0.6% |
| - | 32 | 0.5% |
| ? | 21 | 0.3% |
| ) | 9 | 0.1% |
| ( | 8 | 0.1% |
| ’ | 4 | 0.1% |
| ; | 3 | < 0.1% |
| Other values (5) | 5 | 0.1% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 34190 | |
| Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5722 | ||
| e | 3651 | |
| t | 3083 | 9.0% |
| a | 2255 | 6.6% |
| i | 2193 | 6.4% |
| s | 1951 | 5.7% |
| n | 1944 | 5.7% |
| o | 1926 | 5.6% |
| r | 1576 | 4.6% |
| h | 1476 | 4.3% |
| Other values (30) | 8413 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 4 |
| Distinct | 91 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 96.8% |
| Missing | 405 |
| Missing (%) | 81.2% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | 4 |
|---|---|
| telling the users about the study after it was completed would have made it a bit more ethical | 1 |
| i feel that the individuals who were messaged by the researches should be informed of why they are being contacted, and that information that they provide will be used in an academic study if this is done, then fair play, but it seems that was not done here | 1 |
| the part about not telling people that they are part of a research study because misinformation is spread too much and now the participants will likely believe things that are untrue | 1 |
| of course there is always the concern about funding and bias i wonder if because of the private messaging whether there was any supplemental back-and-forth between the unwilling participant and someone behind the study which has potential for some form of abuse or corruption of data | 1 |
| Other values (86) |
Length
| Max length | 399 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 139.5 |
| Mean length | 99.82978723 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 9384 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 42 |
| Distinct categories | 9 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 90 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 95.7% |
Sample
| 1st row | concerns over the possibility of the researchers having their own political agenda yet fake news is a major problem what social media really is when mass sharing news (political news), is simple propaganda from the left and right |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | full disclosure if research intent |
| 3rd row | how do you pick a representative sample on a non representative platform |
| 4th row | just informing people about the study |
| 5th row | if they used deceiving or untruthful tactics or anything of that nature |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 4 | 0.8% |
| telling the users about the study after it was completed would have made it a bit more ethical | 1 | 0.2% |
| i feel that the individuals who were messaged by the researches should be informed of why they are being contacted, and that information that they provide will be used in an academic study if this is done, then fair play, but it seems that was not done here | 1 | 0.2% |
| the part about not telling people that they are part of a research study because misinformation is spread too much and now the participants will likely believe things that are untrue | 1 | 0.2% |
| of course there is always the concern about funding and bias i wonder if because of the private messaging whether there was any supplemental back-and-forth between the unwilling participant and someone behind the study which has potential for some form of abuse or corruption of data | 1 | 0.2% |
| i'd like to know the exact messages they are sending | 1 | 0.2% |
| you need people consent to do a study on them | 1 | 0.2% |
| if i found out who labeled the misinformation(same people who labeled hunter's laptop?) and if i found out that left leaning were also studied | 1 | 0.2% |
| they aren't deceiving the users, they just aren't keeping them informed | 1 | 0.2% |
| i understand the need to not inform participants and i suppose since all information gathered was in a public shared space there is no presumption of privacy | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (81) | 81 | 16.2% |
| (Missing) | 405 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 99 | 6.0% |
| i | 45 | 2.7% |
| to | 39 | 2.4% |
| of | 36 | 2.2% |
| they | 36 | 2.2% |
| a | 35 | 2.1% |
| if | 34 | 2.1% |
| would | 31 | 1.9% |
| that | 30 | 1.8% |
| study | 27 | 1.6% |
| Other values (502) | 1230 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1556 | ||
| e | 993 | |
| t | 813 | 8.7% |
| a | 598 | 6.4% |
| i | 590 | 6.3% |
| o | 536 | 5.7% |
| s | 524 | 5.6% |
| n | 483 | 5.1% |
| r | 433 | 4.6% |
| h | 403 | 4.3% |
| Other values (32) | 2455 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7722 | |
| Space Separator | 1556 | 16.6% |
| Other Punctuation | 68 | 0.7% |
| Dash Punctuation | 10 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 8 | 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 8 | 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 7 | 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 993 | |
| t | 813 | |
| a | 598 | 7.7% |
| i | 590 | 7.6% |
| o | 536 | 6.9% |
| s | 524 | 6.8% |
| n | 483 | 6.3% |
| r | 433 | 5.6% |
| h | 403 | 5.2% |
| l | 319 | 4.1% |
| Other values (16) | 2030 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 32 | |
| ' | 18 | |
| ? | 9 | 13.2% |
| " | 8 | 11.8% |
| ; | 1 | 1.5% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 4 | |
| 1 | 2 | |
| 2 | 1 | 14.3% |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 7 | |
| [ | 1 | 12.5% |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 7 | |
| ] | 1 | 12.5% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1556 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 10 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 4 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 7726 | |
| Common | 1658 | 17.7% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 993 | |
| t | 813 | 10.5% |
| a | 598 | 7.7% |
| i | 590 | 7.6% |
| o | 536 | 6.9% |
| s | 524 | 6.8% |
| n | 483 | 6.3% |
| r | 433 | 5.6% |
| h | 403 | 5.2% |
| l | 319 | 4.1% |
| Other values (17) | 2034 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1556 | ||
| , | 32 | 1.9% |
| ' | 18 | 1.1% |
| - | 10 | 0.6% |
| ? | 9 | 0.5% |
| " | 8 | 0.5% |
| ( | 7 | 0.4% |
| ) | 7 | 0.4% |
| 0 | 4 | 0.2% |
| 1 | 2 | 0.1% |
| Other values (5) | 5 | 0.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 9383 | |
| Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1556 | ||
| e | 993 | |
| t | 813 | 8.7% |
| a | 598 | 6.4% |
| i | 590 | 6.3% |
| o | 536 | 5.7% |
| s | 524 | 5.6% |
| n | 483 | 5.1% |
| r | 433 | 4.6% |
| h | 403 | 4.3% |
| Other values (31) | 2454 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 3 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.3% |
| Missing | 270 |
| Missing (%) | 54.1% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Somewhat acceptable | |
|---|---|
| Neutral | |
| Somewhat unacceptable |
Length
| Max length | 21 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 16.40611354 |
| Min length | 7 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 3757 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 17 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Neutral |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Somewhat acceptable |
| 3rd row | Somewhat acceptable |
| 4th row | Neutral |
| 5th row | Neutral |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Somewhat acceptable | 134 | |
| Neutral | 56 | 11.2% |
| Somewhat unacceptable | 39 | 7.8% |
| (Missing) | 270 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| somewhat | 173 | |
| acceptable | 134 | |
| neutral | 56 | 13.9% |
| unacceptable | 39 | 9.7% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 575 | |
| a | 575 | |
| t | 402 | |
| c | 346 | |
| l | 229 | 6.1% |
| S | 173 | 4.6% |
| b | 173 | 4.6% |
| p | 173 | 4.6% |
| 173 | 4.6% | |
| o | 173 | 4.6% |
| Other values (7) | 765 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 3355 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 229 | 6.1% |
| Space Separator | 173 | 4.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 575 | |
| a | 575 | |
| t | 402 | |
| c | 346 | |
| l | 229 | 6.8% |
| b | 173 | 5.2% |
| p | 173 | 5.2% |
| o | 173 | 5.2% |
| h | 173 | 5.2% |
| w | 173 | 5.2% |
| Other values (4) | 363 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| S | 173 | |
| N | 56 | 24.5% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 173 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 3584 | |
| Common | 173 | 4.6% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 575 | |
| a | 575 | |
| t | 402 | |
| c | 346 | |
| l | 229 | 6.4% |
| S | 173 | 4.8% |
| b | 173 | 4.8% |
| p | 173 | 4.8% |
| o | 173 | 4.8% |
| h | 173 | 4.8% |
| Other values (6) | 592 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 173 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 3757 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 575 | |
| a | 575 | |
| t | 402 | |
| c | 346 | |
| l | 229 | 6.1% |
| S | 173 | 4.6% |
| b | 173 | 4.6% |
| p | 173 | 4.6% |
| 173 | 4.6% | |
| o | 173 | 4.6% |
| Other values (7) | 765 |
| Distinct | 227 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 99.6% |
| Missing | 271 |
| Missing (%) | 54.3% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | 2 |
|---|---|
| this is more acceptable because participants are informed ahead of time about the use of their data | 1 |
| the study was completely transparent | 1 |
| most importantly, the researchers got the approval of their users first at least the users were aware that they were taking part in a study even though, in my mind, they were severely underpaid | 1 |
| i feel that since all the participants were informed of the process and offered compensation and they willingly participated, there are not any unethical practices used in the process | 1 |
| Other values (222) |
Length
| Max length | 719 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 152.5 |
| Mean length | 126.0175439 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 28732 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 48 |
| Distinct categories | 10 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 226 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 99.1% |
Sample
| 1st row | i find this is ethical as long as participants were fully aware of what was being monitored the results are interesting! no concerns |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | as long as the facebook users were informed that they would be in a study i feel it is fair it was up to the users whether they wanted to participate or not also, they were encouraged, but not actually made to like the facebook study |
| 3rd row | the web extension being used was invasive, even if it was used with consent the people participating in the study are not educated enough on exactly how much information the web extension was taking |
| 4th row | the researchers seem in some ways to try manipulating political viewpoints in a segment of the population for the sake of science |
| 5th row | people willingly consented to being part of the research study, so i believe the study was completely acceptable |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 2 | 0.4% |
| this is more acceptable because participants are informed ahead of time about the use of their data | 1 | 0.2% |
| the study was completely transparent | 1 | 0.2% |
| most importantly, the researchers got the approval of their users first at least the users were aware that they were taking part in a study even though, in my mind, they were severely underpaid | 1 | 0.2% |
| i feel that since all the participants were informed of the process and offered compensation and they willingly participated, there are not any unethical practices used in the process | 1 | 0.2% |
| my only concern is that the browser extension allowed researches to see all of the users' posts i think this would be okay if it was explicitly consented to by the participants, though the above doesn't specify | 1 | 0.2% |
| the researchers gave users an option whether they wanted to be a part of the study or not | 1 | 0.2% |
| this is clearly trying to skew how people view certain topics in social media if thousands of people are not "liking" posts organically it makes post engagement fake especially if this was something that was more related to fake news, and they receive 30k likes, that is problematic | 1 | 0.2% |
| participants self selected and were informed the option to continue to participate in the research was at their discretion i find no ethical concerns with this methodi am curious about how the researchers determined that the original political views were unchanged even in the face of more exposure to opposing news sources especially since the participants were voluntarily visiting the sites with more frequency and had less negative views about them | 1 | 0.2% |
| i see no real ethical issue with this statement that is shown above | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (217) | 217 | |
| (Missing) | 271 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 334 | 6.6% |
| to | 164 | 3.3% |
| i | 128 | 2.5% |
| of | 120 | 2.4% |
| they | 104 | 2.1% |
| were | 104 | 2.1% |
| and | 98 | 1.9% |
| a | 97 | 1.9% |
| that | 96 | 1.9% |
| study | 92 | 1.8% |
| Other values (894) | 3709 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4835 | ||
| e | 3175 | |
| t | 2625 | 9.1% |
| i | 1851 | 6.4% |
| a | 1826 | 6.4% |
| o | 1655 | 5.8% |
| s | 1582 | 5.5% |
| n | 1522 | 5.3% |
| r | 1337 | 4.7% |
| h | 1211 | 4.2% |
| Other values (38) | 7113 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 23632 | |
| Space Separator | 4835 | 16.8% |
| Other Punctuation | 214 | 0.7% |
| Decimal Number | 20 | 0.1% |
| Dash Punctuation | 10 | < 0.1% |
| Currency Symbol | 8 | < 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 5 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 5 | < 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 2 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3175 | |
| t | 2625 | |
| i | 1851 | 7.8% |
| a | 1826 | 7.7% |
| o | 1655 | 7.0% |
| s | 1582 | 6.7% |
| n | 1522 | 6.4% |
| r | 1337 | 5.7% |
| h | 1211 | 5.1% |
| l | 835 | 3.5% |
| Other values (16) | 6013 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 127 | |
| ' | 60 | |
| " | 12 | 5.6% |
| ? | 10 | 4.7% |
| ! | 2 | 0.9% |
| % | 1 | 0.5% |
| ; | 1 | 0.5% |
| : | 1 | 0.5% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 6 | |
| 5 | 6 | |
| 8 | 4 | |
| 3 | 2 | 10.0% |
| 1 | 1 | 5.0% |
| 2 | 1 | 5.0% |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 8 | |
| — | 2 | 20.0% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4835 |
Currency Symbol
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| $ | 8 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 5 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 5 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 2 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 23634 | |
| Common | 5098 | 17.7% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3175 | |
| t | 2625 | |
| i | 1851 | 7.8% |
| a | 1826 | 7.7% |
| o | 1655 | 7.0% |
| s | 1582 | 6.7% |
| n | 1522 | 6.4% |
| r | 1337 | 5.7% |
| h | 1211 | 5.1% |
| l | 835 | 3.5% |
| Other values (17) | 6015 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4835 | ||
| , | 127 | 2.5% |
| ' | 60 | 1.2% |
| " | 12 | 0.2% |
| ? | 10 | 0.2% |
| $ | 8 | 0.2% |
| - | 8 | 0.2% |
| 0 | 6 | 0.1% |
| 5 | 6 | 0.1% |
| ( | 5 | 0.1% |
| Other values (11) | 21 | 0.4% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 28729 | |
| Punctuation | 3 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4835 | ||
| e | 3175 | |
| t | 2625 | 9.1% |
| i | 1851 | 6.4% |
| a | 1826 | 6.4% |
| o | 1655 | 5.8% |
| s | 1582 | 5.5% |
| n | 1522 | 5.3% |
| r | 1337 | 4.7% |
| h | 1211 | 4.2% |
| Other values (36) | 7110 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| — | 2 | |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 76 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
| Missing | 423 |
| Missing (%) | 84.8% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| if the researchers just tracked the people that signed up for the study without asking them first | 1 |
|---|---|
| i'm not sure who would want the results, but to either take money or get the results most would take the money other survey makers would take the results just because it's free information | 1 |
| i think the information is going to be skewed based upon what the user thinks the researcher is looking for they are also more likely to click on political sites because they want to make sure that the researcher is gathering enough data from them | 1 |
| what was collected by the extension would be valuable | 1 |
| so many ways for people to get manipulated with these studies i agree with this one being one of the good ones | 1 |
| Other values (71) |
Length
| Max length | 298 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 107.5 |
| Mean length | 112.7763158 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8571 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 41 |
| Distinct categories | 10 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 76 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | making the source code for the web extension publicly available to have complete transparency over what the extension was doing |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | since the study is revealed as a study, i think it’s ethical, but mostly nonsensical |
| 3rd row | if the browser extension tracked anything besides what is stated it would be unacceptable |
| 4th row | glad to hear the participants know about the research they will be a part of & be rewarded for their time |
| 5th row | since they were aware they were taking part in a study it all seems above board i would generally prefer not to have to install anything |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| if the researchers just tracked the people that signed up for the study without asking them first | 1 | 0.2% |
| i'm not sure who would want the results, but to either take money or get the results most would take the money other survey makers would take the results just because it's free information | 1 | 0.2% |
| i think the information is going to be skewed based upon what the user thinks the researcher is looking for they are also more likely to click on political sites because they want to make sure that the researcher is gathering enough data from them | 1 | 0.2% |
| what was collected by the extension would be valuable | 1 | 0.2% |
| so many ways for people to get manipulated with these studies i agree with this one being one of the good ones | 1 | 0.2% |
| everyone was informed, so i think this is a good study | 1 | 0.2% |
| i think the level of compensation was woefully low which could potentially have skewed the results based on who would possibly participate for such a small amount of money or some lottery chance(i notice that the word acceptable is misspelled in the completely acceptable option) | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would just want to be sure that participants are well informed about the data collection process | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would find it unethical if the researchers mislead the participants or if they used the browser extension to gather information that the participants were not informed of | 1 | 0.2% |
| data should have been shown in a comparison form | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (66) | 66 | 13.2% |
| (Missing) | 423 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 123 | 8.0% |
| to | 48 | 3.1% |
| i | 38 | 2.5% |
| would | 37 | 2.4% |
| of | 29 | 1.9% |
| that | 28 | 1.8% |
| study | 24 | 1.6% |
| was | 23 | 1.5% |
| be | 23 | 1.5% |
| they | 22 | 1.4% |
| Other values (458) | 1134 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1456 | ||
| e | 946 | |
| t | 763 | 8.9% |
| a | 558 | 6.5% |
| o | 547 | 6.4% |
| i | 473 | 5.5% |
| s | 449 | 5.2% |
| n | 407 | 4.7% |
| r | 385 | 4.5% |
| h | 349 | 4.1% |
| Other values (31) | 2238 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7026 | |
| Space Separator | 1456 | 17.0% |
| Other Punctuation | 60 | 0.7% |
| Decimal Number | 10 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 5 | 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 5 | 0.1% |
| Dash Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Currency Symbol | 3 | < 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 1 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 946 | |
| t | 763 | |
| a | 558 | 7.9% |
| o | 547 | 7.8% |
| i | 473 | 6.7% |
| s | 449 | 6.4% |
| n | 407 | 5.8% |
| r | 385 | 5.5% |
| h | 349 | 5.0% |
| l | 286 | 4.1% |
| Other values (15) | 1863 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 34 | |
| ' | 20 | |
| ? | 4 | 6.7% |
| & | 1 | 1.7% |
| ! | 1 | 1.7% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5 | 5 | |
| 8 | 3 | |
| 1 | 1 | 10.0% |
| 0 | 1 | 10.0% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1456 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 5 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 5 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 4 |
Currency Symbol
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| $ | 3 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 1 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 7027 | |
| Common | 1544 | 18.0% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 946 | |
| t | 763 | |
| a | 558 | 7.9% |
| o | 547 | 7.8% |
| i | 473 | 6.7% |
| s | 449 | 6.4% |
| n | 407 | 5.8% |
| r | 385 | 5.5% |
| h | 349 | 5.0% |
| l | 286 | 4.1% |
| Other values (16) | 1864 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1456 | ||
| , | 34 | 2.2% |
| ' | 20 | 1.3% |
| 5 | 5 | 0.3% |
| ( | 5 | 0.3% |
| ) | 5 | 0.3% |
| - | 4 | 0.3% |
| ? | 4 | 0.3% |
| 8 | 3 | 0.2% |
| $ | 3 | 0.2% |
| Other values (5) | 5 | 0.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8570 | |
| Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1456 | ||
| e | 946 | |
| t | 763 | 8.9% |
| a | 558 | 6.5% |
| o | 547 | 6.4% |
| i | 473 | 5.5% |
| s | 449 | 5.2% |
| n | 407 | 4.7% |
| r | 385 | 4.5% |
| h | 349 | 4.1% |
| Other values (30) | 2237 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 3 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 0.9% |
| Missing | 180 |
| Missing (%) | 36.1% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Somewhat acceptable | |
|---|---|
| Somewhat unacceptable | |
| Neutral |
Length
| Max length | 21 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 16.37931034 |
| Min length | 7 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 5225 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 17 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Neutral |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Neutral |
| 3rd row | Somewhat unacceptable |
| 4th row | Somewhat unacceptable |
| 5th row | Somewhat acceptable |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Somewhat acceptable | 121 | |
| Somewhat unacceptable | 110 | |
| Neutral | 88 | |
| (Missing) | 180 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| somewhat | 231 | |
| acceptable | 121 | |
| unacceptable | 110 | |
| neutral | 88 | 16.0% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 781 | |
| a | 781 | |
| t | 550 | |
| c | 462 | 8.8% |
| l | 319 | 6.1% |
| S | 231 | 4.4% |
| b | 231 | 4.4% |
| p | 231 | 4.4% |
| 231 | 4.4% | |
| o | 231 | 4.4% |
| Other values (7) | 1177 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 4675 | |
| Uppercase Letter | 319 | 6.1% |
| Space Separator | 231 | 4.4% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 781 | |
| a | 781 | |
| t | 550 | |
| c | 462 | |
| l | 319 | |
| b | 231 | 4.9% |
| p | 231 | 4.9% |
| o | 231 | 4.9% |
| h | 231 | 4.9% |
| w | 231 | 4.9% |
| Other values (4) | 627 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| S | 231 | |
| N | 88 | 27.6% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 231 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 4994 | |
| Common | 231 | 4.4% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 781 | |
| a | 781 | |
| t | 550 | |
| c | 462 | |
| l | 319 | 6.4% |
| S | 231 | 4.6% |
| b | 231 | 4.6% |
| p | 231 | 4.6% |
| o | 231 | 4.6% |
| h | 231 | 4.6% |
| Other values (6) | 946 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 231 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 5225 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 781 | |
| a | 781 | |
| t | 550 | |
| c | 462 | 8.8% |
| l | 319 | 6.1% |
| S | 231 | 4.4% |
| b | 231 | 4.4% |
| p | 231 | 4.4% |
| 231 | 4.4% | |
| o | 231 | 4.4% |
| Other values (7) | 1177 |
| Distinct | 253 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
| Missing | 246 |
| Missing (%) | 49.3% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| same, the researchers created fake accounts that looked like people this is fraudulent | 1 |
|---|---|
| i don't agree with them hiding behind bots to complete their research and not telling the end user this was for research purposes upfront | 1 |
| the idea that one is not informed that their replies are being used is not acceptable to me, because information in many twitter accounts can successfully identify the person i use twitter a lot, only for sports but i do see a lot of different topics, many political that are posted the amount of bots on twitter is astounding to me, and i would never consider using it for data processing just my opinion | 1 |
| i'm not a big fan of participants being unaware, but as long as they remained anonymous i'm neutral on this one | 1 |
| i object to most studies in which users are not informed that they are being studied and that they are being manipulatedsecondly, i would like to see the type of reply that was originally sent this study almost directly contradicts the results reached in the last study in which people deleted their hate speech because they got a link to a fact checking site along with an empathetic responselastly, i now do my own fact checking after learning that quite a few of these fact checkers are deliberately manipulating and distorting info because of their own bias i simply no longer trust the "fact checkers" | 1 |
| Other values (248) |
Length
| Max length | 815 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 202 |
| Mean length | 140.0079051 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 35422 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 53 |
| Distinct categories | 12 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 253 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | i am uncertain how i feel completely about a researcher creating a fake account however i do understand the desire to protect themselves and to not give away their actions as being part of a study this misinformation needed to be corrected for the public but it opened the original poster to toxicity the op may not have known it was incorrect |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | users were not aware of what was going on so they were possibly more honest in their opinions because they had no idea they were being analyzed |
| 3rd row | many of the people that have large political followings on twitter (and many who don't) often know already the news they are sharing is fake it's political partisanship and the spreading of propaganda some might post fake news only to gain more followers (the masses) if they believe it serves that end |
| 4th row | this study is unethfull disclosure of intent of researchical because they were not informed of the research study |
| 5th row | i have the same objections as before, it’s deceitful and lazy and twitter is a non representative sample of the public |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| same, the researchers created fake accounts that looked like people this is fraudulent | 1 | 0.2% |
| i don't agree with them hiding behind bots to complete their research and not telling the end user this was for research purposes upfront | 1 | 0.2% |
| the idea that one is not informed that their replies are being used is not acceptable to me, because information in many twitter accounts can successfully identify the person i use twitter a lot, only for sports but i do see a lot of different topics, many political that are posted the amount of bots on twitter is astounding to me, and i would never consider using it for data processing just my opinion | 1 | 0.2% |
| i'm not a big fan of participants being unaware, but as long as they remained anonymous i'm neutral on this one | 1 | 0.2% |
| i object to most studies in which users are not informed that they are being studied and that they are being manipulatedsecondly, i would like to see the type of reply that was originally sent this study almost directly contradicts the results reached in the last study in which people deleted their hate speech because they got a link to a fact checking site along with an empathetic responselastly, i now do my own fact checking after learning that quite a few of these fact checkers are deliberately manipulating and distorting info because of their own bias i simply no longer trust the "fact checkers" | 1 | 0.2% |
| since this was done in a public setting, i feel like it is more ethically acceptable than the other study that was similar, but done through private messages | 1 | 0.2% |
| i personally have no issue with this study, though objectively it seems a little dubious to study individuals without their knowledge like this | 1 | 0.2% |
| this is all public, so i have no issue with the researchers observing this | 1 | 0.2% |
| i feel like this is acceptable because when you sign up for social media, if you are posting something publicly it is assumed that anyone can look at these posts and reply to them | 1 | 0.2% |
| i have found that some "fact-checking" sites end up having wrong information as well a great case is how the idea that masks don't work spread many studies have been conducted and some very reputable scientific organizations have studies on their websites that say masks do not work, but the data is typically very small or the type of mask used was a very thin cloth mask, but it gives fuel to people who spread the false information that masking does not work | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (243) | 243 | |
| (Missing) | 246 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 302 | 4.9% |
| to | 152 | 2.5% |
| i | 152 | 2.5% |
| of | 147 | 2.4% |
| that | 147 | 2.4% |
| they | 137 | 2.2% |
| a | 135 | 2.2% |
| is | 120 | 1.9% |
| and | 111 | 1.8% |
| not | 110 | 1.8% |
| Other values (1090) | 4690 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5976 | ||
| e | 3602 | |
| t | 3227 | 9.1% |
| a | 2341 | 6.6% |
| i | 2331 | 6.6% |
| o | 2035 | 5.7% |
| n | 2025 | 5.7% |
| s | 1865 | 5.3% |
| r | 1535 | 4.3% |
| h | 1493 | 4.2% |
| Other values (43) | 8992 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 28986 | |
| Space Separator | 5976 | 16.9% |
| Other Punctuation | 356 | 1.0% |
| Dash Punctuation | 34 | 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 34 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 10 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 9 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 6 | < 0.1% |
| Math Symbol | 5 | < 0.1% |
| Connector Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Other values (2) | 2 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3602 | |
| t | 3227 | |
| a | 2341 | 8.1% |
| i | 2331 | 8.0% |
| o | 2035 | 7.0% |
| n | 2025 | 7.0% |
| s | 1865 | 6.4% |
| r | 1535 | 5.3% |
| h | 1493 | 5.2% |
| d | 1012 | 3.5% |
| Other values (16) | 7520 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 176 | |
| ' | 105 | |
| " | 46 | 12.9% |
| ? | 13 | 3.7% |
| % | 9 | 2.5% |
| & | 3 | 0.8% |
| : | 2 | 0.6% |
| ! | 1 | 0.3% |
| ; | 1 | 0.3% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 13 | |
| 0 | 12 | |
| 7 | 2 | 5.9% |
| 3 | 2 | 5.9% |
| 5 | 2 | 5.9% |
| 1 | 1 | 2.9% |
| 4 | 1 | 2.9% |
| 9 | 1 | 2.9% |
Math Symbol
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| = | 4 | |
| ~ | 1 | 20.0% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5976 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 34 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 10 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 9 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 6 |
Connector Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| _ | 4 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 1 |
Initial Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ‘ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 28987 | |
| Common | 6435 | 18.2% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 3602 | |
| t | 3227 | |
| a | 2341 | 8.1% |
| i | 2331 | 8.0% |
| o | 2035 | 7.0% |
| n | 2025 | 7.0% |
| s | 1865 | 6.4% |
| r | 1535 | 5.3% |
| h | 1493 | 5.2% |
| d | 1012 | 3.5% |
| Other values (17) | 7521 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5976 | ||
| , | 176 | 2.7% |
| ' | 105 | 1.6% |
| " | 46 | 0.7% |
| - | 34 | 0.5% |
| ? | 13 | 0.2% |
| 2 | 13 | 0.2% |
| 0 | 12 | 0.2% |
| ( | 10 | 0.2% |
| ) | 9 | 0.1% |
| Other values (16) | 41 | 0.6% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 35415 | |
| Punctuation | 7 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5976 | ||
| e | 3602 | |
| t | 3227 | 9.1% |
| a | 2341 | 6.6% |
| i | 2331 | 6.6% |
| o | 2035 | 5.7% |
| n | 2025 | 5.7% |
| s | 1865 | 5.3% |
| r | 1535 | 4.3% |
| h | 1493 | 4.2% |
| Other values (41) | 8985 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 6 | |
| ‘ | 1 | 14.3% |
| Distinct | 87 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 100.0% |
| Missing | 412 |
| Missing (%) | 82.6% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| the researchers had a purpose in seeing the responses of those interacting with the post i do not agree with how it was done entirely however i do not know a better way to get the results that were desired | 1 |
|---|---|
| i would not think it is ethical no matter what | 1 |
| the researchers relied on "fact checkers" to determine if the information was "fake" or not if there existed a bias or margin of error in the fact checker's process then the researchers would be working with wrong information themselves | 1 |
| i find it acceptable because this method is helping to slow the spread of misinformation | 1 |
| the outcome of this study has also resulted in negative behavior by the participants due to the experiment | 1 |
| Other values (82) |
Length
| Max length | 577 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 118 |
| Mean length | 113.908046 |
| Min length | 32 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 9910 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 37 |
| Distinct categories | 7 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 87 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 100.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | the researchers had a purpose in seeing the responses of those interacting with the post i do not agree with how it was done entirely however i do not know a better way to get the results that were desired |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | full disclosure of intent of researchers |
| 3rd row | please see comments from the first study |
| 4th row | if they had told people they would be part of an experiment |
| 5th row | i don't use twitter too many bots |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the researchers had a purpose in seeing the responses of those interacting with the post i do not agree with how it was done entirely however i do not know a better way to get the results that were desired | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would not think it is ethical no matter what | 1 | 0.2% |
| the researchers relied on "fact checkers" to determine if the information was "fake" or not if there existed a bias or margin of error in the fact checker's process then the researchers would be working with wrong information themselves | 1 | 0.2% |
| i find it acceptable because this method is helping to slow the spread of misinformation | 1 | 0.2% |
| the outcome of this study has also resulted in negative behavior by the participants due to the experiment | 1 | 0.2% |
| completely unethical customers were unaware of the study and fake accounts were made no one was compensated or aware | 1 | 0.2% |
| i would like to know example content of the tweets and be shown an example of the bot accounts - it's hard to know exactly how individuals would react to someone pointing out their wrong without knowing the profile of the person pointing out the error | 1 | 0.2% |
| researchers should not be spreading fake news in the name of research | 1 | 0.2% |
| fake news is a plague but there's got to be better ways to get rid of it deception | 1 | 0.2% |
| i don't think it's acceptable because non human bots were used and even though they linked to a fact checking website, they are still influencing people and that will cause more divisiveness | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (77) | 77 | 15.4% |
| (Missing) | 412 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 98 | 5.5% |
| to | 59 | 3.3% |
| i | 41 | 2.3% |
| of | 37 | 2.1% |
| it | 36 | 2.0% |
| a | 33 | 1.8% |
| if | 32 | 1.8% |
| they | 31 | 1.7% |
| and | 29 | 1.6% |
| that | 29 | 1.6% |
| Other values (528) | 1360 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1703 | ||
| e | 1088 | |
| t | 910 | 9.2% |
| a | 606 | 6.1% |
| o | 572 | 5.8% |
| i | 571 | 5.8% |
| s | 515 | 5.2% |
| n | 483 | 4.9% |
| h | 441 | 4.5% |
| r | 438 | 4.4% |
| Other values (27) | 2583 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 8109 | |
| Space Separator | 1703 | 17.2% |
| Other Punctuation | 76 | 0.8% |
| Dash Punctuation | 10 | 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 4 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1088 | |
| t | 910 | |
| a | 606 | 7.5% |
| o | 572 | 7.1% |
| i | 571 | 7.0% |
| s | 515 | 6.4% |
| n | 483 | 6.0% |
| h | 441 | 5.4% |
| r | 438 | 5.4% |
| l | 309 | 3.8% |
| Other values (16) | 2176 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 29 | |
| ' | 25 | |
| " | 14 | |
| ? | 6 | 7.9% |
| ; | 2 | 2.6% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 3 | |
| 2 | 1 | 25.0% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1703 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 10 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 4 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 4 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8109 | |
| Common | 1801 | 18.2% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 1088 | |
| t | 910 | |
| a | 606 | 7.5% |
| o | 572 | 7.1% |
| i | 571 | 7.0% |
| s | 515 | 6.4% |
| n | 483 | 6.0% |
| h | 441 | 5.4% |
| r | 438 | 5.4% |
| l | 309 | 3.8% |
| Other values (16) | 2176 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1703 | ||
| , | 29 | 1.6% |
| ' | 25 | 1.4% |
| " | 14 | 0.8% |
| - | 10 | 0.6% |
| ? | 6 | 0.3% |
| ( | 4 | 0.2% |
| ) | 4 | 0.2% |
| 0 | 3 | 0.2% |
| ; | 2 | 0.1% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 9910 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1703 | ||
| e | 1088 | |
| t | 910 | 9.2% |
| a | 606 | 6.1% |
| o | 572 | 5.8% |
| i | 571 | 5.8% |
| s | 515 | 5.2% |
| n | 483 | 4.9% |
| h | 441 | 4.5% |
| r | 438 | 4.4% |
| Other values (27) | 2583 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Moderately important | |
| Extremely important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.53707415 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8751 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Extremely important |
| 4th row | Moderately important |
| 5th row | Extremely important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 165 | |
| Moderately important | 124 | |
| Extremely important | 105 | |
| Slightly important | 67 | |
| Not at all important | 38 | 7.6% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 165 | 15.4% |
| moderately | 124 | 11.5% |
| extremely | 105 | 9.8% |
| slightly | 67 | 6.2% |
| not | 38 | 3.5% |
| at | 38 | 3.5% |
| all | 38 | 3.5% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1370 | |
| r | 893 | |
| a | 699 | 8.0% |
| o | 661 | 7.6% |
| e | 623 | 7.1% |
| m | 604 | 6.9% |
| 575 | 6.6% | |
| i | 566 | 6.5% |
| p | 499 | 5.7% |
| n | 499 | 5.7% |
| Other values (11) | 1762 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7677 | |
| Space Separator | 575 | 6.6% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.7% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1370 | |
| r | 893 | |
| a | 699 | |
| o | 661 | |
| e | 623 | |
| m | 604 | |
| i | 566 | |
| p | 499 | 6.5% |
| n | 499 | 6.5% |
| y | 461 | 6.0% |
| Other values (5) | 802 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 165 | |
| M | 124 | |
| E | 105 | |
| S | 67 | |
| N | 38 | 7.6% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 575 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8176 | |
| Common | 575 | 6.6% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1370 | |
| r | 893 | |
| a | 699 | |
| o | 661 | |
| e | 623 | |
| m | 604 | |
| i | 566 | |
| p | 499 | 6.1% |
| n | 499 | 6.1% |
| y | 461 | 5.6% |
| Other values (10) | 1301 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 575 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8751 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1370 | |
| r | 893 | |
| a | 699 | 8.0% |
| o | 661 | 7.6% |
| e | 623 | 7.1% |
| m | 604 | 6.9% |
| 575 | 6.6% | |
| i | 566 | 6.5% |
| p | 499 | 5.7% |
| n | 499 | 5.7% |
| Other values (11) | 1762 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Not at all important | |
|---|---|
| Very important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Moderately important | |
| Extremely important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 18.17635271 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 9070 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Very important |
| 4th row | Moderately important |
| 5th row | Not at all important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Not at all important | 125 | |
| Very important | 106 | |
| Slightly important | 95 | |
| Moderately important | 89 | |
| Extremely important | 84 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| not | 125 | 10.0% |
| at | 125 | 10.0% |
| all | 125 | 10.0% |
| very | 106 | 8.5% |
| slightly | 95 | 7.6% |
| moderately | 89 | 7.1% |
| extremely | 84 | 6.7% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1516 | |
| a | 838 | |
| r | 778 | |
| 749 | ||
| o | 713 | |
| l | 613 | 6.8% |
| i | 594 | 6.5% |
| m | 583 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 5.5% |
| p | 499 | 5.5% |
| Other values (11) | 1688 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7822 | |
| Space Separator | 749 | 8.3% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.5% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1516 | |
| a | 838 | |
| r | 778 | |
| o | 713 | |
| l | 613 | |
| i | 594 | 7.6% |
| m | 583 | 7.5% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| e | 452 | 5.8% |
| Other values (5) | 737 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 125 | |
| V | 106 | |
| S | 95 | |
| M | 89 | |
| E | 84 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 749 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8321 | |
| Common | 749 | 8.3% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1516 | |
| a | 838 | |
| r | 778 | |
| o | 713 | |
| l | 613 | |
| i | 594 | 7.1% |
| m | 583 | 7.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| e | 452 | 5.4% |
| Other values (10) | 1236 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 749 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 9070 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1516 | |
| a | 838 | |
| r | 778 | |
| 749 | ||
| o | 713 | |
| l | 613 | 6.8% |
| i | 594 | 6.5% |
| m | 583 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 5.5% |
| p | 499 | 5.5% |
| Other values (11) | 1688 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Extremely important | |
| Moderately important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.8496994 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8907 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Very important |
| 4th row | Extremely important |
| 5th row | Not at all important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 136 | |
| Extremely important | 121 | |
| Moderately important | 109 | |
| Slightly important | 68 | |
| Not at all important | 65 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 136 | 12.1% |
| extremely | 121 | 10.7% |
| moderately | 109 | 9.7% |
| slightly | 68 | 6.0% |
| not | 65 | 5.8% |
| at | 65 | 5.8% |
| all | 65 | 5.8% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1426 | |
| r | 865 | |
| a | 738 | |
| o | 673 | 7.6% |
| 629 | 7.1% | |
| m | 620 | 7.0% |
| e | 596 | 6.7% |
| i | 567 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1795 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7779 | |
| Space Separator | 629 | 7.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1426 | |
| r | 865 | |
| a | 738 | |
| o | 673 | |
| m | 620 | |
| e | 596 | |
| i | 567 | 7.3% |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| l | 496 | 6.4% |
| Other values (5) | 800 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 136 | |
| E | 121 | |
| M | 109 | |
| S | 68 | |
| N | 65 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 629 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8278 | |
| Common | 629 | 7.1% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1426 | |
| r | 865 | |
| a | 738 | |
| o | 673 | |
| m | 620 | |
| e | 596 | |
| i | 567 | 6.8% |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| l | 496 | 6.0% |
| Other values (10) | 1299 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 629 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8907 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1426 | |
| r | 865 | |
| a | 738 | |
| o | 673 | 7.6% |
| 629 | 7.1% | |
| m | 620 | 7.0% |
| e | 596 | 6.7% |
| i | 567 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1795 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Moderately important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important | |
| Extremely important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 18.01603206 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8990 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Extremely important |
| 4th row | Very important |
| 5th row | Not at all important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 120 | |
| Moderately important | 119 | |
| Slightly important | 107 | |
| Not at all important | 97 | |
| Extremely important | 56 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 120 | 10.1% |
| moderately | 119 | 10.0% |
| slightly | 107 | 9.0% |
| not | 97 | 8.1% |
| at | 97 | 8.1% |
| all | 97 | 8.1% |
| extremely | 56 | 4.7% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1474 | |
| a | 812 | |
| r | 794 | |
| o | 715 | |
| 693 | 7.7% | |
| i | 606 | 6.7% |
| l | 583 | 6.5% |
| m | 555 | 6.2% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1760 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7798 | |
| Space Separator | 693 | 7.7% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1474 | |
| a | 812 | |
| r | 794 | |
| o | 715 | |
| i | 606 | |
| l | 583 | 7.5% |
| m | 555 | 7.1% |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| e | 470 | 6.0% |
| Other values (5) | 791 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 120 | |
| M | 119 | |
| S | 107 | |
| N | 97 | |
| E | 56 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 693 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8297 | |
| Common | 693 | 7.7% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1474 | |
| a | 812 | |
| r | 794 | |
| o | 715 | |
| i | 606 | |
| l | 583 | 7.0% |
| m | 555 | 6.7% |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| e | 470 | 5.7% |
| Other values (10) | 1290 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 693 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8990 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1474 | |
| a | 812 | |
| r | 794 | |
| o | 715 | |
| 693 | 7.7% | |
| i | 606 | 6.7% |
| l | 583 | 6.5% |
| m | 555 | 6.2% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1760 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Moderately important | |
|---|---|
| Very important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important | |
| Extremely important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 18.17635271 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 9070 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Moderately important |
| 4th row | Moderately important |
| 5th row | Not at all important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Moderately important | 139 | |
| Very important | 109 | |
| Slightly important | 96 | |
| Not at all important | 91 | |
| Extremely important | 64 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| moderately | 139 | 11.8% |
| very | 109 | 9.2% |
| slightly | 96 | 8.1% |
| not | 91 | 7.7% |
| at | 91 | 7.7% |
| all | 91 | 7.7% |
| extremely | 64 | 5.4% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1479 | |
| a | 820 | |
| r | 811 | |
| o | 729 | |
| 681 | 7.5% | |
| i | 595 | 6.6% |
| l | 577 | 6.4% |
| m | 563 | 6.2% |
| e | 515 | 5.7% |
| p | 499 | 5.5% |
| Other values (11) | 1801 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7890 | |
| Space Separator | 681 | 7.5% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.5% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1479 | |
| a | 820 | |
| r | 811 | |
| o | 729 | |
| i | 595 | |
| l | 577 | 7.3% |
| m | 563 | 7.1% |
| e | 515 | 6.5% |
| p | 499 | 6.3% |
| n | 499 | 6.3% |
| Other values (5) | 803 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| M | 139 | |
| V | 109 | |
| S | 96 | |
| N | 91 | |
| E | 64 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 681 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8389 | |
| Common | 681 | 7.5% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1479 | |
| a | 820 | |
| r | 811 | |
| o | 729 | |
| i | 595 | |
| l | 577 | 6.9% |
| m | 563 | 6.7% |
| e | 515 | 6.1% |
| p | 499 | 5.9% |
| n | 499 | 5.9% |
| Other values (10) | 1302 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 681 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 9070 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1479 | |
| a | 820 | |
| r | 811 | |
| o | 729 | |
| 681 | 7.5% | |
| i | 595 | 6.6% |
| l | 577 | 6.4% |
| m | 563 | 6.2% |
| e | 515 | 5.7% |
| p | 499 | 5.5% |
| Other values (11) | 1801 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Moderately important | |
| Extremely important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.60320641 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8784 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Slightly important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Very important |
| 4th row | Very important |
| 5th row | Extremely important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 162 | |
| Moderately important | 145 | |
| Extremely important | 94 | |
| Slightly important | 65 | |
| Not at all important | 33 | 6.6% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 162 | 15.2% |
| moderately | 145 | 13.6% |
| extremely | 94 | 8.8% |
| slightly | 65 | 6.1% |
| not | 33 | 3.1% |
| at | 33 | 3.1% |
| all | 33 | 3.1% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1368 | |
| r | 900 | |
| a | 710 | |
| o | 677 | 7.7% |
| e | 640 | 7.3% |
| m | 593 | 6.8% |
| 565 | 6.4% | |
| i | 564 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.7% |
| n | 499 | 5.7% |
| Other values (11) | 1769 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7720 | |
| Space Separator | 565 | 6.4% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.7% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1368 | |
| r | 900 | |
| a | 710 | |
| o | 677 | |
| e | 640 | |
| m | 593 | |
| i | 564 | |
| p | 499 | 6.5% |
| n | 499 | 6.5% |
| y | 466 | 6.0% |
| Other values (5) | 804 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 162 | |
| M | 145 | |
| E | 94 | |
| S | 65 | |
| N | 33 | 6.6% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 565 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8219 | |
| Common | 565 | 6.4% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1368 | |
| r | 900 | |
| a | 710 | |
| o | 677 | |
| e | 640 | |
| m | 593 | |
| i | 564 | |
| p | 499 | 6.1% |
| n | 499 | 6.1% |
| y | 466 | 5.7% |
| Other values (10) | 1303 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 565 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8784 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1368 | |
| r | 900 | |
| a | 710 | |
| o | 677 | 7.7% |
| e | 640 | 7.3% |
| m | 593 | 6.8% |
| 565 | 6.4% | |
| i | 564 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.7% |
| n | 499 | 5.7% |
| Other values (11) | 1769 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Extremely important | |
|---|---|
| Very important | |
| Moderately important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.81763527 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8891 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Slightly important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Moderately important |
| 3rd row | Moderately important |
| 4th row | Extremely important |
| 5th row | Slightly important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Extremely important | 191 | |
| Very important | 132 | |
| Moderately important | 92 | |
| Slightly important | 53 | 10.6% |
| Not at all important | 31 | 6.2% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| extremely | 191 | 18.0% |
| very | 132 | 12.5% |
| moderately | 92 | 8.7% |
| slightly | 53 | 5.0% |
| not | 31 | 2.9% |
| at | 31 | 2.9% |
| all | 31 | 2.9% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1396 | |
| r | 914 | |
| e | 698 | 7.9% |
| m | 690 | 7.8% |
| a | 653 | 7.3% |
| o | 622 | 7.0% |
| 561 | 6.3% | |
| i | 552 | 6.2% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1807 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7831 | |
| Space Separator | 561 | 6.3% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1396 | |
| r | 914 | |
| e | 698 | |
| m | 690 | |
| a | 653 | |
| o | 622 | |
| i | 552 | 7.0% |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| y | 468 | 6.0% |
| Other values (5) | 840 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| E | 191 | |
| V | 132 | |
| M | 92 | |
| S | 53 | 10.6% |
| N | 31 | 6.2% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 561 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8330 | |
| Common | 561 | 6.3% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1396 | |
| r | 914 | |
| e | 698 | |
| m | 690 | |
| a | 653 | |
| o | 622 | |
| i | 552 | 6.6% |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| y | 468 | 5.6% |
| Other values (10) | 1339 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 561 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8891 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1396 | |
| r | 914 | |
| e | 698 | 7.9% |
| m | 690 | 7.8% |
| a | 653 | 7.3% |
| o | 622 | 7.0% |
| 561 | 6.3% | |
| i | 552 | 6.2% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1807 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Moderately important | |
| Extremely important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.79358717 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8879 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Extremely important |
| 4th row | Very important |
| 5th row | Not at all important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 139 | |
| Moderately important | 114 | |
| Extremely important | 107 | |
| Slightly important | 80 | |
| Not at all important | 59 |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 139 | 12.5% |
| moderately | 114 | 10.2% |
| extremely | 107 | 9.6% |
| slightly | 80 | 7.2% |
| not | 59 | 5.3% |
| at | 59 | 5.3% |
| all | 59 | 5.3% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1417 | |
| r | 859 | |
| a | 731 | |
| o | 672 | 7.6% |
| 617 | 6.9% | |
| m | 606 | 6.8% |
| e | 581 | 6.5% |
| i | 579 | 6.5% |
| l | 499 | 5.6% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1819 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7763 | |
| Space Separator | 617 | 6.9% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1417 | |
| r | 859 | |
| a | 731 | |
| o | 672 | |
| m | 606 | |
| e | 581 | |
| i | 579 | |
| l | 499 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| Other values (5) | 821 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 139 | |
| M | 114 | |
| E | 107 | |
| S | 80 | |
| N | 59 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 617 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8262 | |
| Common | 617 | 6.9% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1417 | |
| r | 859 | |
| a | 731 | |
| o | 672 | |
| m | 606 | |
| e | 581 | |
| i | 579 | |
| l | 499 | 6.0% |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| Other values (10) | 1320 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 617 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8879 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1417 | |
| r | 859 | |
| a | 731 | |
| o | 672 | 7.6% |
| 617 | 6.9% | |
| m | 606 | 6.8% |
| e | 581 | 6.5% |
| i | 579 | 6.5% |
| l | 499 | 5.6% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1819 |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 839.0 B |
| Very important | |
|---|---|
| Moderately important | |
| Extremely important | |
| Slightly important | |
| Not at all important |
Length
| Max length | 20 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 19 |
| Mean length | 17.7755511 |
| Min length | 14 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 8870 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 21 |
| Distinct categories | 3 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | Not at all important |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | Not at all important |
| 3rd row | Not at all important |
| 4th row | Very important |
| 5th row | Extremely important |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Very important | 144 | |
| Moderately important | 130 | |
| Extremely important | 106 | |
| Slightly important | 70 | |
| Not at all important | 49 | 9.8% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| important | 499 | |
| very | 144 | 13.1% |
| moderately | 130 | 11.9% |
| extremely | 106 | 9.7% |
| slightly | 70 | 6.4% |
| not | 49 | 4.5% |
| at | 49 | 4.5% |
| all | 49 | 4.5% |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1402 | |
| r | 879 | |
| a | 727 | |
| o | 678 | 7.6% |
| e | 616 | 6.9% |
| m | 605 | 6.8% |
| 597 | 6.7% | |
| i | 569 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1799 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 7774 | |
| Space Separator | 597 | 6.7% |
| Uppercase Letter | 499 | 5.6% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1402 | |
| r | 879 | |
| a | 727 | |
| o | 678 | |
| e | 616 | |
| m | 605 | |
| i | 569 | |
| p | 499 | 6.4% |
| n | 499 | 6.4% |
| l | 474 | 6.1% |
| Other values (5) | 826 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| V | 144 | |
| M | 130 | |
| E | 106 | |
| S | 70 | |
| N | 49 | 9.8% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 597 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 8273 | |
| Common | 597 | 6.7% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1402 | |
| r | 879 | |
| a | 727 | |
| o | 678 | |
| e | 616 | |
| m | 605 | |
| i | 569 | |
| p | 499 | 6.0% |
| n | 499 | 6.0% |
| l | 474 | 5.7% |
| Other values (10) | 1325 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 597 |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 8870 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| t | 1402 | |
| r | 879 | |
| a | 727 | |
| o | 678 | 7.6% |
| e | 616 | 6.9% |
| m | 605 | 6.8% |
| 597 | 6.7% | |
| i | 569 | 6.4% |
| p | 499 | 5.6% |
| n | 499 | 5.6% |
| Other values (11) | 1799 |
| Distinct | 192 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 96.0% |
| Missing | 299 |
| Missing (%) | 59.9% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | 9 |
|---|---|
| whether or not the research is going to be publicly available | 1 |
| no i think that covered them all | 1 |
| awareness by the user, extremely important | 1 |
| all the responses were raw and that's how the most accurate data is collected | 1 |
| Other values (187) |
Length
| Max length | 652 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 179.5 |
| Mean length | 125.945 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 25189 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 43 |
| Distinct categories | 10 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 191 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 95.5% |
Sample
| 1st row | the only aspects of social media research that would cause concern for me is saving photographs or imaging data |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | none that i can think of, other than what has been asked already |
| 3rd row | reducing any type of hate is always a good thing |
| 4th row | na i have already voiced my concerns about researching this in general from this surveys other questions |
| 5th row | the possibility of bot accounts spreading misinformation or hate speech just for the purpose of an experiment |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 9 | 1.8% |
| whether or not the research is going to be publicly available | 1 | 0.2% |
| no i think that covered them all | 1 | 0.2% |
| awareness by the user, extremely important | 1 | 0.2% |
| all the responses were raw and that's how the most accurate data is collected | 1 | 0.2% |
| engagement in the study just like this survey, are they participants paying attention | 1 | 0.2% |
| there are no other aspects that i can think of | 1 | 0.2% |
| this type of research is only going to give you data on a small demographic as longas the researchers know this | 1 | 0.2% |
| i cannot think of any other aspects of research conducted on social media that are important to me in determining levels of concern | 1 | 0.2% |
| once again my focus, based on my experience on social media along with my interest in doing studiessurveys on prolific, is that users be informed if there is an intent to try to change or manipulate someone's online behaviorstudying posts objectively is one thing, but deliberately trying to get someone to act differently is unacceptable that is what advertisers, political operatives and propagandists do it is may also be why i have seen user activity drop off during this current campaign season too many accounts are being flagged for supposed violations when people have only posted honest questions regarding the facts or truth behind some claim | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (182) | 182 | |
| (Missing) | 299 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 200 | 4.5% |
| of | 129 | 2.9% |
| is | 128 | 2.9% |
| to | 121 | 2.7% |
| i | 113 | 2.6% |
| a | 81 | 1.8% |
| that | 80 | 1.8% |
| and | 79 | 1.8% |
| it | 64 | 1.4% |
| are | 62 | 1.4% |
| Other values (1009) | 3369 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4253 | ||
| e | 2532 | |
| t | 2029 | 8.1% |
| a | 1715 | 6.8% |
| i | 1692 | 6.7% |
| o | 1566 | 6.2% |
| n | 1479 | 5.9% |
| s | 1342 | 5.3% |
| r | 1224 | 4.9% |
| h | 1051 | 4.2% |
| Other values (33) | 6306 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 20659 | |
| Space Separator | 4253 | 16.9% |
| Other Punctuation | 229 | 0.9% |
| Dash Punctuation | 19 | 0.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 9 | < 0.1% |
| Open Punctuation | 6 | < 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 5 | < 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Decimal Number | 4 | < 0.1% |
| Math Symbol | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 2532 | |
| t | 2029 | 9.8% |
| a | 1715 | 8.3% |
| i | 1692 | 8.2% |
| o | 1566 | 7.6% |
| n | 1479 | 7.2% |
| s | 1342 | 6.5% |
| r | 1224 | 5.9% |
| h | 1051 | 5.1% |
| l | 794 | 3.8% |
| Other values (16) | 5235 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 125 | |
| ' | 78 | |
| ? | 14 | 6.1% |
| " | 10 | 4.4% |
| … | 1 | 0.4% |
| : | 1 | 0.4% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 1 | |
| 4 | 1 | |
| 1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 1 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4253 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 19 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 9 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 6 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 5 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 4 |
Math Symbol
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| + | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 20668 | |
| Common | 4521 | 17.9% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 2532 | |
| t | 2029 | 9.8% |
| a | 1715 | 8.3% |
| i | 1692 | 8.2% |
| o | 1566 | 7.6% |
| n | 1479 | 7.2% |
| s | 1342 | 6.5% |
| r | 1224 | 5.9% |
| h | 1051 | 5.1% |
| l | 794 | 3.8% |
| Other values (17) | 5244 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4253 | ||
| , | 125 | 2.8% |
| ' | 78 | 1.7% |
| - | 19 | 0.4% |
| ? | 14 | 0.3% |
| " | 10 | 0.2% |
| ( | 6 | 0.1% |
| ) | 5 | 0.1% |
| ’ | 4 | 0.1% |
| … | 1 | < 0.1% |
| Other values (6) | 6 | 0.1% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 25184 | |
| Punctuation | 5 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4253 | ||
| e | 2532 | |
| t | 2029 | 8.1% |
| a | 1715 | 6.8% |
| i | 1692 | 6.7% |
| o | 1566 | 6.2% |
| n | 1479 | 5.9% |
| s | 1342 | 5.3% |
| r | 1224 | 4.9% |
| h | 1051 | 4.2% |
| Other values (31) | 6301 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 4 | |
| … | 1 | 20.0% |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 5.521042084 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 2 |
| Q1 | 5 |
| median | 6 |
| Q3 | 7 |
| 95-th percentile | 7 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 2 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.679386636 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.3041792855 |
| Kurtosis | 0.1087548301 |
| Mean | 5.521042084 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | -1.025007039 |
| Sum | 2755 |
| Variance | 2.820339474 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 203 | |
| 6 | 102 | |
| 5 | 70 | 14.0% |
| 4 | 49 | 9.8% |
| 3 | 42 | 8.4% |
| 2 | 17 | 3.4% |
| 1 | 16 | 3.2% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 16 | 3.2% |
| 2 | 17 | 3.4% |
| 3 | 42 | 8.4% |
| 4 | 49 | 9.8% |
| 5 | 70 | 14.0% |
| 6 | 102 | |
| 7 | 203 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 203 | |
| 6 | 102 | |
| 5 | 70 | 14.0% |
| 4 | 49 | 9.8% |
| 3 | 42 | 8.4% |
| 2 | 17 | 3.4% |
| 1 | 16 | 3.2% |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 3.527054108 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 1 |
| Q1 | 2 |
| median | 3 |
| Q3 | 5 |
| 95-th percentile | 7 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 3 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 2.057596743 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.5833754402 |
| Kurtosis | -1.187605078 |
| Mean | 3.527054108 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 2 |
| Skewness | 0.3541560179 |
| Sum | 1760 |
| Variance | 4.233704357 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 106 | |
| 2 | 93 | |
| 3 | 71 | |
| 4 | 70 | |
| 7 | 62 | |
| 6 | 56 | |
| 5 | 41 | 8.2% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 106 | |
| 2 | 93 | |
| 3 | 71 | |
| 4 | 70 | |
| 5 | 41 | 8.2% |
| 6 | 56 | |
| 7 | 62 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 62 | |
| 6 | 56 | |
| 5 | 41 | 8.2% |
| 4 | 70 | |
| 3 | 71 | |
| 2 | 93 | |
| 1 | 106 |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 4.651302605 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 1 |
| Q1 | 4 |
| median | 5 |
| Q3 | 6 |
| 95-th percentile | 7 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 2 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.671474984 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.3593563192 |
| Kurtosis | -0.5866613384 |
| Mean | 4.651302605 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | -0.4219703321 |
| Sum | 2321 |
| Variance | 2.793828621 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 5 | 115 | |
| 6 | 96 | |
| 4 | 91 | |
| 7 | 75 | |
| 3 | 63 | |
| 2 | 33 | 6.6% |
| 1 | 26 | 5.2% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 26 | 5.2% |
| 2 | 33 | 6.6% |
| 3 | 63 | |
| 4 | 91 | |
| 5 | 115 | |
| 6 | 96 | |
| 7 | 75 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 75 | |
| 6 | 96 | |
| 5 | 115 | |
| 4 | 91 | |
| 3 | 63 | |
| 2 | 33 | 6.6% |
| 1 | 26 | 5.2% |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 3.054108216 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 1 |
| Q1 | 2 |
| median | 3 |
| Q3 | 4 |
| 95-th percentile | 6 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 2 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.587816994 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.5198954594 |
| Kurtosis | -0.4222403 |
| Mean | 3.054108216 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | 0.6240587048 |
| Sum | 1524 |
| Variance | 2.521162808 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 3 | 105 | |
| 1 | 81 | |
| 4 | 74 | |
| 5 | 51 | 10.2% |
| 6 | 34 | 6.8% |
| 7 | 13 | 2.6% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 81 | |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 3 | 105 | |
| 4 | 74 | |
| 5 | 51 | 10.2% |
| 6 | 34 | 6.8% |
| 7 | 13 | 2.6% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 13 | 2.6% |
| 6 | 34 | 6.8% |
| 5 | 51 | 10.2% |
| 4 | 74 | |
| 3 | 105 | |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 1 | 81 |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 2.69739479 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 1 |
| Q1 | 1 |
| median | 2 |
| Q3 | 4 |
| 95-th percentile | 6 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 3 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.808784129 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.6705670732 |
| Kurtosis | -0.4651366385 |
| Mean | 2.69739479 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | 0.8169441724 |
| Sum | 1346 |
| Variance | 3.271700027 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 189 | |
| 2 | 91 | |
| 3 | 66 | 13.2% |
| 4 | 58 | 11.6% |
| 5 | 45 | 9.0% |
| 6 | 30 | 6.0% |
| 7 | 20 | 4.0% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 189 | |
| 2 | 91 | |
| 3 | 66 | 13.2% |
| 4 | 58 | 11.6% |
| 5 | 45 | 9.0% |
| 6 | 30 | 6.0% |
| 7 | 20 | 4.0% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 20 | 4.0% |
| 6 | 30 | 6.0% |
| 5 | 45 | 9.0% |
| 4 | 58 | 11.6% |
| 3 | 66 | 13.2% |
| 2 | 91 | |
| 1 | 189 |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 4.975951904 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 2 |
| Q1 | 4 |
| median | 5 |
| Q3 | 6 |
| 95-th percentile | 7 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 2 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.616749319 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.3249125695 |
| Kurtosis | -0.4443151664 |
| Mean | 4.975951904 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | -0.5992454593 |
| Sum | 2483 |
| Variance | 2.613878359 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 6 | 122 | |
| 5 | 111 | |
| 7 | 97 | |
| 4 | 68 | |
| 3 | 58 | |
| 2 | 28 | 5.6% |
| 1 | 15 | 3.0% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 15 | 3.0% |
| 2 | 28 | 5.6% |
| 3 | 58 | |
| 4 | 68 | |
| 5 | 111 | |
| 6 | 122 | |
| 7 | 97 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 97 | |
| 6 | 122 | |
| 5 | 111 | |
| 4 | 68 | |
| 3 | 58 | |
| 2 | 28 | 5.6% |
| 1 | 15 | 3.0% |
| Distinct | 7 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.4% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 3.573146293 |
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 7 |
| Zeros | 0 |
| Zeros (%) | 0.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 1 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 1 |
| Q1 | 2 |
| median | 3 |
| Q3 | 5 |
| 95-th percentile | 7 |
| Maximum | 7 |
| Range | 6 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 3 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.760841438 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.4927985854 |
| Kurtosis | -0.9434350009 |
| Mean | 3.573146293 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | 0.2559463962 |
| Sum | 1783 |
| Variance | 3.100562571 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 96 | |
| 3 | 94 | |
| 4 | 89 | |
| 1 | 66 | |
| 5 | 66 | |
| 6 | 59 | |
| 7 | 29 | 5.8% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 66 | |
| 2 | 96 | |
| 3 | 94 | |
| 4 | 89 | |
| 5 | 66 | |
| 6 | 59 | |
| 7 | 29 | 5.8% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 7 | 29 | 5.8% |
| 6 | 59 | |
| 5 | 66 | |
| 4 | 89 | |
| 3 | 94 | |
| 2 | 96 | |
| 1 | 66 |
| Distinct | 67 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 82.7% |
| Missing | 418 |
| Missing (%) | 83.8% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | |
|---|---|
| carrying out the study in a way that it is not going to be skewed based upon what the user believes the researcher is looking for | 1 |
| honesty when disseminating the information | 1 |
| inform participants of study after | 1 |
| understanding the limits of the internet | 1 |
| Other values (62) |
Length
| Max length | 336 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 163 |
| Mean length | 79.72839506 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 6458 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 39 |
| Distinct categories | 9 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 66 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 81.5% |
Sample
| 1st row | a full disclosure of any political organizations of which a researcher belongs to or has donated to within a previous time frame (such as 4 yrs) |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | the researchers should not intrude into the user's personal lives |
| 3rd row | full disclosure of intent of research |
| 4th row | None |
| 5th row | don't intentionally mislead unknowing participants sending them links to a fake fact checking site would be an example 4 |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 15 | 3.0% |
| carrying out the study in a way that it is not going to be skewed based upon what the user believes the researcher is looking for | 1 | 0.2% |
| honesty when disseminating the information | 1 | 0.2% |
| inform participants of study after | 1 | 0.2% |
| understanding the limits of the internet | 1 | 0.2% |
| the social media service (twittet, facebook, etc) knows the data is being collected | 1 | 0.2% |
| explain where they get the info on people to study did they pay for it? | 1 | 0.2% |
| methods used to interact with participants whether awareunaware and the expected knowledge of social platforms for modern usersie - using automated bot accounts will likely skew experiment results due to intelligent users identifying bots versus real humans | 1 | 0.2% |
| usefulness - is the study or experiment actually useful in the sense that its results or process is beneficial to those in the study or to people outside of it, aside from the researchers? | 1 | 0.2% |
| i think the above list covers everything if there are more things to consider, they're not coming to mind for me, and i've sat here thinking for awhile (timer is down to 12 minutes left, and i have no idea how many more pages are left in this study, so i should probably stop typing here and carry on so i don't run out of time overall) | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (57) | 57 | 11.4% |
| (Missing) | 418 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 60 | 5.6% |
| to | 33 | 3.1% |
| of | 31 | 2.9% |
| be | 25 | 2.3% |
| and | 21 | 2.0% |
| for | 19 | 1.8% |
| is | 18 | 1.7% |
| that | 17 | 1.6% |
| study | 17 | 1.6% |
| or | 17 | 1.6% |
| Other values (441) | 809 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 990 | ||
| e | 625 | 9.7% |
| t | 555 | 8.6% |
| a | 443 | 6.9% |
| i | 437 | 6.8% |
| o | 421 | 6.5% |
| n | 381 | 5.9% |
| s | 353 | 5.5% |
| r | 345 | 5.3% |
| h | 231 | 3.6% |
| Other values (29) | 1677 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 5345 | |
| Space Separator | 990 | 15.3% |
| Other Punctuation | 66 | 1.0% |
| Uppercase Letter | 15 | 0.2% |
| Close Punctuation | 11 | 0.2% |
| Open Punctuation | 11 | 0.2% |
| Dash Punctuation | 10 | 0.2% |
| Decimal Number | 9 | 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 625 | |
| t | 555 | |
| a | 443 | 8.3% |
| i | 437 | 8.2% |
| o | 421 | 7.9% |
| n | 381 | 7.1% |
| s | 353 | 6.6% |
| r | 345 | 6.5% |
| h | 231 | 4.3% |
| d | 204 | 3.8% |
| Other values (16) | 1350 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 36 | |
| ' | 18 | |
| " | 8 | 12.1% |
| ? | 4 | 6.1% |
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 2 | 4 | |
| 4 | 3 | |
| 1 | 2 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 990 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 15 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 11 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 11 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 10 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 5360 | |
| Common | 1098 | 17.0% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 625 | |
| t | 555 | |
| a | 443 | 8.3% |
| i | 437 | 8.2% |
| o | 421 | 7.9% |
| n | 381 | 7.1% |
| s | 353 | 6.6% |
| r | 345 | 6.4% |
| h | 231 | 4.3% |
| d | 204 | 3.8% |
| Other values (17) | 1365 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 990 | ||
| , | 36 | 3.3% |
| ' | 18 | 1.6% |
| ) | 11 | 1.0% |
| ( | 11 | 1.0% |
| - | 10 | 0.9% |
| " | 8 | 0.7% |
| ? | 4 | 0.4% |
| 2 | 4 | 0.4% |
| 4 | 3 | 0.3% |
| Other values (2) | 3 | 0.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 6457 | |
| Punctuation | 1 | < 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 990 | ||
| e | 625 | 9.7% |
| t | 555 | 8.6% |
| a | 443 | 6.9% |
| i | 437 | 6.8% |
| o | 421 | 6.5% |
| n | 381 | 5.9% |
| s | 353 | 5.5% |
| r | 345 | 5.3% |
| h | 231 | 3.6% |
| Other values (28) | 1676 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 11 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 7.4% |
| Missing | 350 |
| Missing (%) | 70.1% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 4.429530201 |
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 10 |
| Zeros | 12 |
| Zeros (%) | 2.4% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 0 |
| Q1 | 1 |
| median | 4 |
| Q3 | 8 |
| 95-th percentile | 8.6 |
| Maximum | 10 |
| Range | 10 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 7 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 3.323249455 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.7502487406 |
| Kurtosis | -1.605372616 |
| Mean | 4.429530201 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 3 |
| Skewness | 0.1127040338 |
| Sum | 660 |
| Variance | 11.04398694 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 8 | 44 | 8.8% |
| 1 | 42 | 8.4% |
| 0 | 12 | 2.4% |
| 3 | 12 | 2.4% |
| 4 | 10 | 2.0% |
| 10 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 6 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 7 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 5 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| (Missing) | 350 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 12 | 2.4% |
| 1 | 42 | |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 3 | 12 | 2.4% |
| 4 | 10 | 2.0% |
| 5 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 6 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 7 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 8 | 44 | |
| 9 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 10 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 9 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 8 | 44 | |
| 7 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 6 | 6 | 1.2% |
| 5 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 4 | 10 | 2.0% |
| 3 | 12 | 2.4% |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 1 | 42 |
| Distinct | 19 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 73.1% |
| Missing | 473 |
| Missing (%) | 94.8% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | |
|---|---|
| interact as a researcher it will carry more weight if people know who is suggesting or informing and this does matter | 1 |
| minimize threats to social media users mental health by the study manipulations | 1 |
| must be for positive societal movement, not backwards movement | 1 |
| researchers must maintain participant confidentiality | 1 |
| Other values (14) |
Length
| Max length | 132 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 79 |
| Mean length | 40.30769231 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 1048 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 28 |
| Distinct categories | 4 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 18 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 69.2% |
Sample
| 1st row | None |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | abiding by the laws of research |
| 3rd row | None |
| 4th row | ensure payments alongside bonus |
| 5th row | privacy that their identity will not be known |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 8 | 1.6% |
| interact as a researcher it will carry more weight if people know who is suggesting or informing and this does matter | 1 | 0.2% |
| minimize threats to social media users mental health by the study manipulations | 1 | 0.2% |
| must be for positive societal movement, not backwards movement | 1 | 0.2% |
| researchers must maintain participant confidentiality | 1 | 0.2% |
| at the conclusion, the user should have the option to have their data dismissed | 1 | 0.2% |
| laws keep lawsuits to a minimal | 1 | 0.2% |
| information about who the researchers are | 1 | 0.2% |
| they should be required to state which political party they make financial contributions to , and how much money they give each year | 1 | 0.2% |
| be mindful of manipulation that could skewer the results you desire | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (9) | 9 | 1.8% |
| (Missing) | 473 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 11 | 6.3% |
| none | 8 | 4.6% |
| to | 6 | 3.4% |
| be | 4 | 2.3% |
| and | 3 | 1.7% |
| of | 3 | 1.7% |
| they | 3 | 1.7% |
| study | 3 | 1.7% |
| are | 3 | 1.7% |
| movement | 2 | 1.1% |
| Other values (112) | 128 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 148 | ||
| e | 110 | |
| t | 84 | 8.0% |
| a | 75 | 7.2% |
| i | 74 | 7.1% |
| s | 63 | 6.0% |
| o | 63 | 6.0% |
| n | 60 | 5.7% |
| r | 55 | 5.2% |
| h | 44 | 4.2% |
| Other values (18) | 272 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 889 | |
| Space Separator | 148 | 14.1% |
| Uppercase Letter | 8 | 0.8% |
| Other Punctuation | 3 | 0.3% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 110 | |
| t | 84 | 9.4% |
| a | 75 | 8.4% |
| i | 74 | 8.3% |
| s | 63 | 7.1% |
| o | 63 | 7.1% |
| n | 60 | 6.7% |
| r | 55 | 6.2% |
| h | 44 | 4.9% |
| l | 30 | 3.4% |
| Other values (15) | 231 |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 148 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 8 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 3 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 897 | |
| Common | 151 | 14.4% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 110 | |
| t | 84 | 9.4% |
| a | 75 | 8.4% |
| i | 74 | 8.2% |
| s | 63 | 7.0% |
| o | 63 | 7.0% |
| n | 60 | 6.7% |
| r | 55 | 6.1% |
| h | 44 | 4.9% |
| l | 30 | 3.3% |
| Other values (16) | 239 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 148 | ||
| , | 3 | 2.0% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 1048 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 148 | ||
| e | 110 | |
| t | 84 | 8.0% |
| a | 75 | 7.2% |
| i | 74 | 7.1% |
| s | 63 | 6.0% |
| o | 63 | 6.0% |
| n | 60 | 5.7% |
| r | 55 | 5.2% |
| h | 44 | 4.2% |
| Other values (18) | 272 |
| Distinct | 10 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 11.5% |
| Missing | 412 |
| Missing (%) | 82.6% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 5.172413793 |
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 10 |
| Zeros | 11 |
| Zeros (%) | 2.2% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 0 |
| Q1 | 2 |
| median | 5 |
| Q3 | 9 |
| 95-th percentile | 10 |
| Maximum | 10 |
| Range | 10 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 7 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 3.84044237 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.7424855248 |
| Kurtosis | -1.808645945 |
| Mean | 5.172413793 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 4 |
| Skewness | -0.05284867363 |
| Sum | 450 |
| Variance | 14.74899759 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 9 | 29 | 5.8% |
| 2 | 20 | 4.0% |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| 1 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 10 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 5 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 3 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 7 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 6 | 1 | 0.2% |
| (Missing) | 412 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| 1 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 2 | 20 | |
| 3 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 5 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 6 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 7 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 9 | 29 | |
| 10 | 7 | 1.4% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 10 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 9 | 29 | |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 7 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 6 | 1 | 0.2% |
| 5 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 3 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 2 | 20 | |
| 1 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| Distinct | 19 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 86.4% |
| Missing | 477 |
| Missing (%) | 95.6% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| None | |
|---|---|
| ethical application in the real world | 1 |
| cost vs benefits for study participants will they be compensated in some way? | 1 |
| inform participants about the study's outcomes after the study has been concluded and analyzed | 1 |
| length of study and data collection | 1 |
| Other values (14) |
Length
| Max length | 94 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 63.5 |
| Mean length | 43.36363636 |
| Min length | 4 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 954 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 33 |
| Distinct categories | 7 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 2 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 2 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 18 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 81.8% |
Sample
| 1st row | give results after entire experiment is done |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | confidentiality of participants information |
| 3rd row | None |
| 4th row | collection of data that is personal |
| 5th row | promise to offer access to study results ifwhen available |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| None | 4 | 0.8% |
| ethical application in the real world | 1 | 0.2% |
| cost vs benefits for study participants will they be compensated in some way? | 1 | 0.2% |
| inform participants about the study's outcomes after the study has been concluded and analyzed | 1 | 0.2% |
| length of study and data collection | 1 | 0.2% |
| all unknowing participants notified of use of their info | 1 | 0.2% |
| research misconduct, such as:fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism | 1 | 0.2% |
| size of the study how many people are they collecting data on | 1 | 0.2% |
| the user should be given the results of the study when it is over | 1 | 0.2% |
| adherence to regulations (like gdpr) | 1 | 0.2% |
| Other values (9) | 9 | 1.8% |
| (Missing) | 477 |
Length
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| the | 11 | 7.1% |
| of | 8 | 5.2% |
| study | 6 | 3.9% |
| none | 4 | 2.6% |
| is | 4 | 2.6% |
| participants | 4 | 2.6% |
| and | 4 | 2.6% |
| to | 4 | 2.6% |
| data | 3 | 1.9% |
| are | 3 | 1.9% |
| Other values (91) | 103 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 133 | ||
| e | 93 | 9.7% |
| t | 87 | 9.1% |
| i | 73 | 7.7% |
| n | 63 | 6.6% |
| a | 62 | 6.5% |
| o | 61 | 6.4% |
| s | 54 | 5.7% |
| r | 42 | 4.4% |
| l | 34 | 3.6% |
| Other values (23) | 252 |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Lowercase Letter | 808 | |
| Space Separator | 133 | 13.9% |
| Other Punctuation | 6 | 0.6% |
| Uppercase Letter | 4 | 0.4% |
| Open Punctuation | 1 | 0.1% |
| Close Punctuation | 1 | 0.1% |
| Final Punctuation | 1 | 0.1% |
Most frequent character per category
Lowercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 93 | |
| t | 87 | |
| i | 73 | 9.0% |
| n | 63 | 7.8% |
| a | 62 | 7.7% |
| o | 61 | 7.5% |
| s | 54 | 6.7% |
| r | 42 | 5.2% |
| l | 34 | 4.2% |
| h | 33 | 4.1% |
| Other values (14) | 206 |
Other Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| , | 3 | |
| ' | 1 | 16.7% |
| ? | 1 | 16.7% |
| : | 1 | 16.7% |
Space Separator
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 133 |
Uppercase Letter
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| N | 4 |
Open Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ( | 1 |
Close Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ) | 1 |
Final Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Latin | 812 | |
| Common | 142 | 14.9% |
Most frequent character per script
Latin
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| e | 93 | |
| t | 87 | |
| i | 73 | 9.0% |
| n | 63 | 7.8% |
| a | 62 | 7.6% |
| o | 61 | 7.5% |
| s | 54 | 6.7% |
| r | 42 | 5.2% |
| l | 34 | 4.2% |
| h | 33 | 4.1% |
| Other values (15) | 210 |
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 133 | ||
| , | 3 | 2.1% |
| ' | 1 | 0.7% |
| ? | 1 | 0.7% |
| : | 1 | 0.7% |
| ( | 1 | 0.7% |
| ) | 1 | 0.7% |
| ’ | 1 | 0.7% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 953 | |
| Punctuation | 1 | 0.1% |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 133 | ||
| e | 93 | 9.8% |
| t | 87 | 9.1% |
| i | 73 | 7.7% |
| n | 63 | 6.6% |
| a | 62 | 6.5% |
| o | 61 | 6.4% |
| s | 54 | 5.7% |
| r | 42 | 4.4% |
| l | 34 | 3.6% |
| Other values (22) | 251 |
Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ’ | 1 |
| Distinct | 9 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 11.0% |
| Missing | 417 |
| Missing (%) | 83.6% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 5.817073171 |
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 10 |
| Zeros | 11 |
| Zeros (%) | 2.2% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 0 |
| Q1 | 2 |
| median | 7 |
| Q3 | 10 |
| 95-th percentile | 10 |
| Maximum | 10 |
| Range | 10 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 8 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 4.079845219 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.7013570397 |
| Kurtosis | -1.742930501 |
| Mean | 5.817073171 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 3 |
| Skewness | -0.181235257 |
| Sum | 477 |
| Variance | 16.64513701 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 10 | 32 | 6.4% |
| 3 | 15 | 3.0% |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| 1 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 9 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 6 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 4 | 2 | 0.4% |
| (Missing) | 417 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| 1 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 3 | 15 | |
| 4 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 6 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 9 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 10 | 32 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 10 | 32 | |
| 9 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 8 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 6 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 4 | 2 | 0.4% |
| 3 | 15 | |
| 2 | 4 | 0.8% |
| 1 | 7 | 1.4% |
| 0 | 11 | 2.2% |
| Distinct | 8 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.6% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 1.869739479 |
| Minimum | -3 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 4 |
| Zeros | 47 |
| Zeros (%) | 9.4% |
| Negative | 21 |
| Negative (%) | 4.2% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | -3 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 0 |
| Q1 | 1 |
| median | 2 |
| Q3 | 3 |
| 95-th percentile | 3 |
| Maximum | 4 |
| Range | 7 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 2 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 1.212827247 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.6486610894 |
| Kurtosis | 0.112523089 |
| Mean | 1.869739479 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 1 |
| Skewness | -0.6708705122 |
| Sum | 933 |
| Variance | 1.470949932 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 3 | 167 | |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 1 | 106 | |
| 0 | 47 | 9.4% |
| -1 | 19 | 3.8% |
| 4 | 17 | 3.4% |
| -2 | 1 | 0.2% |
| -3 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| -3 | 1 | 0.2% |
| -2 | 1 | 0.2% |
| -1 | 19 | 3.8% |
| 0 | 47 | 9.4% |
| 1 | 106 | |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 3 | 167 | |
| 4 | 17 | 3.4% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 4 | 17 | 3.4% |
| 3 | 167 | |
| 2 | 141 | |
| 1 | 106 | |
| 0 | 47 | 9.4% |
| -1 | 19 | 3.8% |
| -2 | 1 | 0.2% |
| -3 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Distinct | 5 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 1.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
| 1 | |
|---|---|
| 2 | |
| 0 | |
| 3 | |
| -1 | 12 |
Length
| Max length | 2 |
|---|---|
| Median length | 1 |
| Mean length | 1.024048096 |
| Min length | 1 |
Characters and Unicode
| Total characters | 511 |
|---|---|
| Distinct characters | 5 |
| Distinct categories | 2 ? |
| Distinct scripts | 1 ? |
| Distinct blocks | 1 ? |
Unique
| Unique | 0 ? |
|---|---|
| Unique (%) | 0.0% |
Sample
| 1st row | 0 |
|---|---|
| 2nd row | 1 |
| 3rd row | 2 |
| 4th row | 1 |
| 5th row | 3 |
Common Values
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 156 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 | |
| -1 | 12 | 2.4% |
Length
Category Frequency Plot
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 168 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 |
Most occurring characters
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 168 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 | |
| - | 12 | 2.3% |
Most occurring categories
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Decimal Number | 499 | |
| Dash Punctuation | 12 | 2.3% |
Most frequent character per category
Decimal Number
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 168 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 |
Dash Punctuation
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| - | 12 |
Most occurring scripts
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| Common | 511 |
Most frequent character per script
Common
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 168 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 | |
| - | 12 | 2.3% |
Most occurring blocks
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| ASCII | 511 |
Most frequent character per block
ASCII
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 1 | 168 | |
| 2 | 146 | |
| 0 | 117 | |
| 3 | 68 | |
| - | 12 | 2.3% |
| Distinct | 10 |
|---|---|
| Distinct (%) | 2.0% |
| Missing | 0 |
| Missing (%) | 0.0% |
| Infinite | 0 |
| Infinite (%) | 0.0% |
| Mean | 6.569138277 |
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| Maximum | 9 |
| Zeros | 5 |
| Zeros (%) | 1.0% |
| Negative | 0 |
| Negative (%) | 0.0% |
| Memory size | 4.0 KiB |
Quantile statistics
| Minimum | 0 |
|---|---|
| 5-th percentile | 2 |
| Q1 | 5 |
| median | 7 |
| Q3 | 9 |
| 95-th percentile | 9 |
| Maximum | 9 |
| Range | 9 |
| Interquartile range (IQR) | 4 |
Descriptive statistics
| Standard deviation | 2.368791708 |
|---|---|
| Coefficient of variation (CV) | 0.3605939787 |
| Kurtosis | -0.4509960942 |
| Mean | 6.569138277 |
| Median Absolute Deviation (MAD) | 2 |
| Skewness | -0.6818309309 |
| Sum | 3278 |
| Variance | 5.611174156 |
| Monotonicity | Not monotonic |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 9 | 167 | |
| 5 | 61 | 12.2% |
| 7 | 59 | 11.8% |
| 6 | 55 | 11.0% |
| 8 | 52 | 10.4% |
| 4 | 47 | 9.4% |
| 3 | 31 | 6.2% |
| 1 | 14 | 2.8% |
| 2 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 0 | 5 | 1.0% |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 0 | 5 | 1.0% |
| 1 | 14 | 2.8% |
| 2 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 3 | 31 | 6.2% |
| 4 | 47 | 9.4% |
| 5 | 61 | 12.2% |
| 6 | 55 | 11.0% |
| 7 | 59 | 11.8% |
| 8 | 52 | 10.4% |
| 9 | 167 |
| Value | Count | Frequency (%) |
| 9 | 167 | |
| 8 | 52 | 10.4% |
| 7 | 59 | 11.8% |
| 6 | 55 | 11.0% |
| 5 | 61 | 12.2% |
| 4 | 47 | 9.4% |
| 3 | 31 | 6.2% |
| 2 | 8 | 1.6% |
| 1 | 14 | 2.8% |
| 0 | 5 | 1.0% |
Auto
The auto setting is an easily interpretable pairwise column metric of the following mapping: vartype-vartype : method, categorical-categorical : Cramer's V, numerical-categorical : Cramer's V (using a discretized numerical column), numerical-numerical : Spearman's ρ. This configuration uses the best suitable for each pair of columns.Spearman's ρ
The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (ρ) is a measure of monotonic correlation between two variables, and is therefore better in catching nonlinear monotonic correlations than Pearson's r. It's value lies between -1 and +1, -1 indicating total negative monotonic correlation, 0 indicating no monotonic correlation and 1 indicating total positive monotonic correlation.To calculate ρ for two variables X and Y, one divides the covariance of the rank variables of X and Y by the product of their standard deviations.
Pearson's r
The Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) is a measure of linear correlation between two variables. It's value lies between -1 and +1, -1 indicating total negative linear correlation, 0 indicating no linear correlation and 1 indicating total positive linear correlation. Furthermore, r is invariant under separate changes in location and scale of the two variables, implying that for a linear function the angle to the x-axis does not affect r.To calculate r for two variables X and Y, one divides the covariance of X and Y by the product of their standard deviations.
Kendall's τ
Similarly to Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, the Kendall rank correlation coefficient (τ) measures ordinal association between two variables. It's value lies between -1 and +1, -1 indicating total negative correlation, 0 indicating no correlation and 1 indicating total positive correlation.To calculate τ for two variables X and Y, one determines the number of concordant and discordant pairs of observations. τ is given by the number of concordant pairs minus the discordant pairs divided by the total number of pairs.
Cramér's V (φc)
Cramér's V is an association measure for nominal random variables. The coefficient ranges from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating independence and 1 indicating perfect association. The empirical estimators used for Cramér's V have been proved to be biased, even for large samples. We use a bias-corrected measure that has been proposed by Bergsma in 2013 that can be found here.Phik (φk)
Phik (φk) is a new and practical correlation coefficient that works consistently between categorical, ordinal and interval variables, captures non-linear dependency and reverts to the Pearson correlation coefficient in case of a bivariate normal input distribution. There is extensive documentation available here.First rows
| df_index | sm_use | age | gender_id | ethnic_id | edu | politic_views | aware_sm_res | aware_sm_advan | aware_sm_interact | aware_sm_use | ethic_appr | study_1_ethic_acc | study_1_conc | study_1_add_info | study_2_ethic_acc | study_2_conc | study_2_add_info | study_3_ethic_acc | study_3_conc | study_3_add_info | study_4_ethic_acc | study_4_conc | study_4_add_info | design_cont | design_num_users | design_res_purp | design_len_data | design_admin_inter | design_inter_type | design_partic_aware | design_inter_impact | design_type_data | design_add_fac | rank_sci_repro | rank_resp | rank_just | rank_anony | rank_harms | rank_balance | rank_pub_interst | rank_add_fac_1 | rank_add_fac_1_pos | rank_add_fac_2 | rank_add_fac_2_pos | rank_add_fac_3 | rank_add_fac_3_pos | aware_sm_advan_score | aware_sm_interact_score | aware_sm_use_score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 29.0 | Male | Asian - Eastern | Highschool | Slightly liberal | Extremely aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys)] | [Creating fake accounts ("bots"), Secretly changing the content of what users see] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | The scope of the project and actions there in do not cross certain boundaries that may purposefully negatively affect participants as well as legal regulations and standard practices. | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Slightly important | Slightly important | Not at all important | Not at all important | NaN | 2.0 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 4 | 0 | 9 | |
| 1 | 2 | 33.0 | Male | Mixed race | Highschool | Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Secretly changing the content of what users see] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | I think Ethical Approval means that the experiment is gathering data without harm or injury to people. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Moderately important | Not at all important | Not at all important | the only aspects of social media research that would cause concern for me is saving photographs or imaging data | 3.0 | 5.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 1.0 | 7.0 | 4.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 1 | 1 | 9 | |
| 2 | 3 | 33.0 | Female | Pacific Islander | Bachelor's degree | Very liberal | Extremely aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots"), Secretly changing the content of what users see] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | Researchers focus on ethical standards towards those they gain data from. They need approval of their approach and receive methods. | NaN | no concerns i would have loved to partake in this study in terms of watching the results | NaN | NaN | going to the poster privately provided opportunity for change without the possibly of increased toxicity from users i prefer this method over commenting the "correct information" | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | i find this is ethical as long as participants were fully aware of what was being monitored the results are interesting! no concerns | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | i am uncertain how i feel completely about a researcher creating a fake account however i do understand the desire to protect themselves and to not give away their actions as being part of a study this misinformation needed to be corrected for the public but it opened the original poster to toxicity the op may not have known it was incorrect | the researchers had a purpose in seeing the responses of those interacting with the post i do not agree with how it was done entirely however i do not know a better way to get the results that were desired | Extremely important | Very important | Very important | Extremely important | Moderately important | Very important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Not at all important | none that i can think of, other than what has been asked already | 7.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 2 | 2 | 5 | |
| 3 | 4 | 73.0 | Female | White / Caucasian | Highschool | Slightly conservative | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation)] | I would think that using "ethical approval" means that the things others collect on social media sites would need to be honest and moral. Hopefully, there would be no under-handedness used in collecting information. | Neutral | i feel if people know they are being judged they will act, speak, or write differently than if they don't know they are being analyzed | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | i feel as though, in the above case, users had a choice to respond or not so i think it was honest | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | as long as the facebook users were informed that they would be in a study i feel it is fair it was up to the users whether they wanted to participate or not also, they were encouraged, but not actually made to like the facebook study | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | users were not aware of what was going on so they were possibly more honest in their opinions because they had no idea they were being analyzed | NaN | Moderately important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Very important | Moderately important | Very important | Extremely important | Very important | Very important | reducing any type of hate is always a good thing | 7.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | NaN | 8.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 1 | 1 | 6 | |
| 4 | 5 | 27.0 | Female | Native-American | Highschool | Very liberal | Extremely aware | [… often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | A set of rules of what to do and what to not do. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | the web extension being used was invasive, even if it was used with consent the people participating in the study are not educated enough on exactly how much information the web extension was taking | making the source code for the web extension publicly available to have complete transparency over what the extension was doing | NaN | NaN | NaN | Extremely important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Extremely important | Slightly important | Not at all important | Extremely important | NaN | 3.0 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 0 | 3 | 9 | |
| 5 | 6 | 49.0 | Female | Hispanic | Bachelor's degree | Slightly liberal | Slightly aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots"), Hacking into users' accounts] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | is when the participants have the right to know who was access to their data and what is being done with it. | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | NaN | Very important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | NaN | 7.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 2 | 1 | 5 | |
| 6 | 7 | 53.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Highschool | Slightly conservative | Slightly aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect, … are unaffected by the way social media platforms work] | [None of the above] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation)] | Verification of some sort that social media users and/or the data being used is not being skewed to support a theory or the results in any way. | Completey unacceptable | easy enough for an outside government to try copying such a study with the sole purpose of creating much more polarization, hate, etc not that it hasn't been tried and tested perhaps innumerable times by all types of foreign or domestic entities as far as we know no actual study would have really been needed to know that using a type of marketing manipulation could alter the recipients moodlevels of concernanxietyhateetc | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | concerns over the possibility of the researchers having their own political agenda yet fake news is a major problem what social media really is when mass sharing news (political news), is simple propaganda from the left and right | Neutral | the researchers seem in some ways to try manipulating political viewpoints in a segment of the population for the sake of science | NaN | Neutral | many of the people that have large political followings on twitter (and many who don't) often know already the news they are sharing is fake it's political partisanship and the spreading of propaganda some might post fake news only to gain more followers (the masses) if they believe it serves that end | NaN | Moderately important | Extremely important | Slightly important | Very important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Very important | na i have already voiced my concerns about researching this in general from this surveys other questions | 6.0 | 7.0 | 5.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | a full disclosure of any political organizations of which a researcher belongs to or has donated to within a previous time frame (such as 4 yrs) | 8.0 | NaN | 9.0 | NaN | 10.0 | 2 | 0 | 5 | |
| 7 | 8 | 29.0 | Female | White / Caucasian | Highschool | Slightly liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation)] | Going through a process of peer review maybe? Like earlier you mentioned creating bot accounts, so maybe making sure the researcher isn’t spreading hate or misinformation | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Very important | the possibility of bot accounts spreading misinformation or hate speech just for the purpose of an experiment | 7.0 | 6.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 3 | 6 | |
| 8 | 9 | 23.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Bachelor's degree | Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | Moderately aware | [… are unaffected by the way social media platforms work] | [Publicly posting on users' profiles] | [Social networks] | Social media is a collective term for websites and applications that focus on communication, community-based input, interaction, content-sharing and collaboration. | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Neutral | NaN | NaN | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | no, i didn't anything like that | 5.0 | 4.0 | 7.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | NaN | 6.0 | NaN | 5.0 | NaN | 8.0 | -1 | 1 | 1 | |
| 9 | 10 | 65.0 | Male | Hispanic | Highschool | Very liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | Whether or not something goes against someone's right to privacy online. | NaN | NaN | i would be interested to know what kind of messages they sent the hate speech users that got them to change their minds | NaN | it's perfectly within someone's right to send someone else a message on any platform, therefore i believe this study was acceptable | NaN | NaN | people willingly consented to being part of the research study, so i believe the study was completely acceptable | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Not at all important | Slightly important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Moderately important | Very important | Not at all important | NaN | 5.0 | 3.0 | 7.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 6.0 | 2.0 | the researchers should not intrude into the user's personal lives | 8.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 2 | 8 |
Last rows
| df_index | sm_use | age | gender_id | ethnic_id | edu | politic_views | aware_sm_res | aware_sm_advan | aware_sm_interact | aware_sm_use | ethic_appr | study_1_ethic_acc | study_1_conc | study_1_add_info | study_2_ethic_acc | study_2_conc | study_2_add_info | study_3_ethic_acc | study_3_conc | study_3_add_info | study_4_ethic_acc | study_4_conc | study_4_add_info | design_cont | design_num_users | design_res_purp | design_len_data | design_admin_inter | design_inter_type | design_partic_aware | design_inter_impact | design_type_data | design_add_fac | rank_sci_repro | rank_resp | rank_just | rank_anony | rank_harms | rank_balance | rank_pub_interst | rank_add_fac_1 | rank_add_fac_1_pos | rank_add_fac_2 | rank_add_fac_2_pos | rank_add_fac_3 | rank_add_fac_3_pos | aware_sm_advan_score | aware_sm_interact_score | aware_sm_use_score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 489 | 490 | 37.0 | Female | White / Caucasian | Master's degree or above | Slightly liberal | Very aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [None of the above] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | That the researchers would use the acquired users data in an ethical manner without manipulating it. Keeping the users data safe and secure. | Somewhat acceptable | accounts were anonymous and operated by the human which is fine and the outcome was awesome so i would say that type of research is somewhat acceptable | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | creating fake accounts and sending unsolicited private messages to users is unethical | NaN | NaN | the researchers tried to bribe and manipulate the social media users | i do not approve this practice by the researchers | Somewhat unacceptable | creating fake accounts for research or any other purposes is not acceptable or ethical to me | NaN | Very important | Very important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Very important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Extremely important | None | 7.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 6.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 2 | 0 | 9 | |
| 490 | 491 | 44.0 | Male | African-American | Highschool | Slightly liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | To be approved by the original source it came from. | NaN | this should be done more often, it's a good thing to do, completely acceptable | hate speech is a serious issue, we need to do better | Somewhat acceptable | i think it's in their best concerns to reduce the amount of misinformation, and also help fact check what's posted | it's acceptable on my behalf due to the researchers posting facts | Somewhat acceptable | i can relate to going to another news source to see what information they're giving, and doing this study in this type of way is intriguing | NaN | Neutral | i'm not sure if this is good, or bad | NaN | Extremely important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Very important | Extremely important | Very important | Extremely important | Extremely important | who the researchers are targeting on social media sites race, sex, job type, political view | 2.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 6.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 3 | 9 | |
| 491 | 492 | 39.0 | Female | White / Caucasian | Highschool | Slightly conservative | Extremely aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Creating fake accounts ("bots"), Secretly changing the content of what users see] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation)] | It means that possible risks have been considered and deemed acceptable. | Completey unacceptable | participants should have the right to accept or decline to participate in the study | NaN | NaN | participants should be made aware of the study and have the option to either accept or decline being included in it | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | the participants should have been made aware that they were part of a study and either accept or decline taking part in it | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Extremely important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Extremely important | Very important | Very important | NaN | 7.0 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 1 | 7 | |
| 492 | 493 | 54.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Bachelor's degree | Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | Slightly aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | Assurance that the experimenters will use the data and information collected only for the purpose explained in the study. Also, that the person being polled is aware of their rights and redresses, if necessary, by a board or body overseeing the researchers. Generally, that the experiment will cause no foreseeable harm to the people being polled. | Neutral | it's concerning that the study misrepresented the nature of the anonymous accounts who replied to the message it's understandable that they wanted sincere reactions to the messages they sent and that informing the recipients they weren't real people could have caused the messages to be disregarded or met with a level of denial, but since there were a range of responses to the original hate speech, i wonder if any of the replies were incendiary, which could cause the original user to get even more emotionally involved, stressed, or angry, which could lead to actual violence or emotional distress i'd imagine if they were trying to measure how people reacted to different messages they would have to have them grouped into at least empathetic, neutral, and contrary types of messages the researchers sent | it's hard to judge without seeing the actual content of the messages, so i'd want to see that and who is overseeing the study and how closely it's being monitored | Somewhat acceptable | same as the others, that the subjects were unaware of the experiment i do find the anonymous accounts more acceptable than the human-looking automated accounts | NaN | NaN | NaN | it seems the study was forthcoming and transparent and that participants had to opt in to join it, so i can't see any issues, as long as all other processes are in place (eg the study is being overseen, etc) | Somewhat acceptable | while most of the study seems innocuous, for instance, the bot is just replying with a tweet about fact-checking that the user can choose not to click, it's always concerning when the subjects don't know they're part of an experiment and that the automated accounts were apparently made to look like a human user | i'd want to make sure the study is only using publicly-made twitter statements and not going any further by looking into other social media sites the user might have linked or any other biographical information that could be discerned | Slightly important | Not at all important | Slightly important | Not at all important | Very important | Slightly important | Extremely important | Not at all important | Extremely important | NaN | 7.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 2 | 3 | 8 | |
| 493 | 494 | 32.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Master's degree or above | Slightly conservative | Very aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | Ethical approval means getting approval from the University or the government or both. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | some people may not want to be contacted privately | NaN | choosing between the results of their own data or money is completely unacceptable why should participants have to pay to view their own data? they created it, so they should have access to it if they want it | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Very important | Very important | Very important | Slightly important | Very important | Extremely important | Very important | Extremely important | Extremely important | NaN | 7.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 6.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 1 | 9 | |
| 494 | 495 | 35.0 | Female | White / Caucasian | Bachelor's degree | Neutral/ Neither conservative or liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Creating fake accounts ("bots"), Secretly changing the content of what users see] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | Approval to do any type of thing that might be deceptive. | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | it seems a little too deceptive to me | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Moderately important | Moderately important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Very important | Extremely important | Very important | Very important | NaN | 6.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 7.0 | 2.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 2 | 0 | 9 | |
| 495 | 496 | 39.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Master's degree or above | Very conservative | Moderately aware | [… reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect, … are always representative of people’s offline behavior, … are unaffected by the way social media platforms work] | [Publicly posting on users' profiles] | [Health topics (e.g. spread of diseases), Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | It has to with researchers taking a mental note of the standards meant to be followed while conducting research experiment. | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Extremely important | Slightly important | Extremely important | Moderately important | Slightly important | Extremely important | Extremely important | Slightly important | Very important | i can't think of any other aspects | 7.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 1.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 0 | 1 | 6 | |
| 496 | 497 | 37.0 | Female | African-American | Highschool | Very liberal | Not at all aware | [… often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | I think ethical approval means that institutions have to deem the experiments as tests that most would approve of. | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Slightly important | Not at all important | Not at all important | NaN | 7.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 0 | 1 | 4 | |
| 497 | 498 | 23.0 | Female | African-American | Highschool | Slightly liberal | Slightly aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Economic forecasting, Presidential approval ratings, Well-being and economic satisfaction, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | I think ethical approval means that the experiment has to be deemed as appropriate, safe, and not have long-term consequences. | Somewhat unacceptable | it is unacceptable that the users were never made aware that it was a study and the researcher analyzed the user's behaviors for weeks | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | it is good that the researchers only examined data that was collected during the experiment period but unacceptable that the users were messaged privately and were not made aware that it was a experiment | NaN | Somewhat acceptable | it is good that users were made aware that it was a study and what the users had to do was related to the research topic | NaN | Neutral | it is good that the researchers only analyzed the users' behaviors for a short period after the experiment but it is not appropriate that the researchers never told the users that it was an experiment | NaN | Slightly important | Not at all important | Not at all important | Extremely important | Not at all important | Moderately important | Very important | Very important | Moderately important | NaN | 6.0 | 2.0 | 7.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 1.0 | long-term effects of the experiment | 4.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 1 | 2 | 8 | |
| 498 | 499 | 55.0 | Male | White / Caucasian | Vocational training | Very liberal | Moderately aware | [… are large and can contain millions of data points, … reflect events in real-time and can be collected continuously over time, … are naturalistic in that they do not require researchers to directly interact with research volunteers, … often capture social relationships not found using traditional methods (e.g. surveys), … are readily accessible to researchers and easy to collect] | [Privately messaging users, Publicly posting on users' profiles, Creating fake accounts ("bots")] | [Political elections (e.g. voting behavior), Presidential approval ratings, Communication (e.g. spread of opinions and hate-speech), Public sentiment (e.g. environment-related concerns), News consumption (e.g. sharing of misinformation), Social networks] | I think ethical approval is that an academic experiment is run in an ethical way. Meaning that the researchers adhere to ethical standards. | Somewhat unacceptable | the fact that participants were not aware they were part of a research study is a concern | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | i find it somewhat unacceptable that researchers sent unsolicited private messages | if the researchers had contacted the twitter users instead of sending unsolicited private messages i would probably find it a little more ethical | NaN | NaN | NaN | Somewhat unacceptable | the users were not informed that they are part of an academic research and deceived by human looking automatic accounts | NaN | Moderately important | Not at all important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Moderately important | Very important | Extremely important | Slightly important | Moderately important | NaN | 7.0 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 6.0 | 4.0 | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | NaN | 3 | 3 | 6 |